Corrected exemption claim under Notification No. 6/2006-CE was valid; denial of exemption and penalty could not survive.

Where clearances were made after Notification No. 6/2006-CE came into force, a later correction from an incorrect exemption notification to the proper one was not a retrospective claim. The record showed no objection to eligibility under the correct notification itself, only to the timing of the corrected claim. The principle that a claimant may seek the correct exemption at a later stage was applied, so denial of exemption was unsustainable and the demand and penalty could not survive.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant's claim for exemption could be treated as a corrected claim under Notification No. 6/2006-CE instead of a retrospective claim, and whether denial of exemption and consequential penalty was sustainable.

Analysis: The clearances were made after Notification No. 6/2006-CE came into force, so the claim was not for retrospective application of the notification. The appellant had initially referred to the wrong exemption notification and later corrected the claim to the proper notification applicable to the clearances. The record did not show any objection in the show cause notice to the appellant's eligibility under Notification No. 6/2006-CE itself; the dispute was only on the timing of the corrected claim. The principle that a claimant is not barred from seeking the correct exemption at a later stage was applied.

Conclusion: The denial of exemption was unsustainable, the demand and penalty could not survive, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.

---