Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Heard Sri A.P. Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Amit Mahajan, Advocate for respondent No. 3.

2. The parties have requested and agreed that this matter may be heard and decided finally at this stage since only a question of law has been raised regarding interpretation of notification dated 6.9.2004 and, hence, I proceed to hear and decided the matter finally at this stage under the Rules of the Court.

3. The petitioner is a Merchant Exporter. He claims to procure medicines from other manufacturer like, M/s Shifa Laboratories (P) Ltd. Noida for export of purchased goods at its end. He sought rebate for Rs. 3,97,003/-, Rs. 4,63,714/-, Rs. 3,37,184/- and Rs. 2,78,256/- by lodging his claims before Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise Division-I, Noida (hereinafter referred to as the “ACCE”) vide applications, received in the office of ACCE on 15.2.2005. The ACCE while processing aforesaid claims found that petitioner has not complied with the procedure prescribed in Notification No. 19/2004-C.E.(N.T.) dated 6.9.2004 issued under Rule 18 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules, 2002”) and hence issued sh