TMI Blog1998 (10) TMI 220X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Briefly stated facts of this case are as follows :- 1.2 The respondents herein were engaged in the manufacture of glass bottles falling under sub-heading 7007.90 and availing the benefit of Notification No. 175/86, dated 1-3-1986 upto 31-3-1989. Since their declaration of excisable goods during the period 1988-1989 exceeded Rs. 1.5 crores, they were disentitled to the benefit of the said notific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 75 lakhs have to be reckoned from 1-4-1989 because the notification specifically says so. In other words, Revenue intends to include the duty paid clearances effected by the respondents herein during the period 1-4-1989 to 26-4-1989 towards computing aggregate clearances of specified goods of Rs. 75 lakhs. On the other hand, contention of the respondents is that this limit will count only f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the notification. 5. On the other hand, Revenue s contention is that the notification specifically gives the cut off date as 1st day of April in any financial year for computing the various clearances mentioned in terms of the notification. Therefore, once an assessee has come within the ambit of the notification computation will have to be done, according to Revenue, in terms of the cut off d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enefit of the clearances made during the earlier period i.e. 1-4-1989 to 26-4-1989 but that would amount to giving the exemption notification retrospective effect. On the same analogy we cannot give retrospective effect to the contention of the Revenue by counting the clearances for the period 1-4-1989 to 26-4-1989 for computing clearances in terms of the said notification since that would amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
