Clarificatory amendment to excise notification held not retrospective, preserving refund benefit under the original exemption scheme.

An amending excise notification was treated as clarificatory because it only identified the notified industrial areas with greater precision, rather than creating a new benefit or expanding the scope of the earlier exemption. On that basis, the later amendment was held not to operate retrospectively, and the refund benefit under the original notification remained available to the unit covered by the notification.

---

---

Issues: Whether the amending notification was retrospective or merely clarificatory so as to extend the refund benefit under the earlier exemption notification to the respondent's unit.

Analysis: The refund claim was based on Notification No. 56/2002-C.E., and the later Notification No. 79/2003-C.E. amended the description of the notified industrial areas. The amendment was held to be only a more accurate identification of the same areas already intended to be covered. Since the change merely specified the location with greater precision, no new benefit was created and no retrospective operation was involved.

Conclusion: The amendment was held to be clarificatory and not retrospective, and the refund benefit under the notification was available to the respondent.

---