Unconditional excise exemption for mechanized clay bricks cannot be denied merely for non-claim in earlier filings.

An unconditional exemption under Notification No. 333/86-CE applied to clay bricks manufactured in mechanized brick plants, and the benefit could not be denied merely because it was not earlier claimed under Rule 173B. The appellant had already availed the general small scale exemption under Notification No. 175/1986-CE, so there was no prior occasion to claim the specific exemption for the unaccounted AR bricks found in stock. As the goods satisfied the notification conditions, rejection of the exemption claim on the ground of non-claim was unsustainable, and the denial was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 333/86-CE dated 11.06.1986 in respect of unaccounted AR bricks found in stock, despite not having claimed that exemption earlier under Rule 173B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944.

Analysis: The exemption under Notification No. 333/86-CE was found to be unconditional and applicable to clay bricks manufactured in mechanized brick plants. The appellant had already availed the general small scale exemption under Notification No. 175/1986-CE, and therefore had no earlier occasion to claim the specific exemption now in issue. Since the goods satisfied the requirements of the exemption notification, denial of the benefit solely on the ground that it had not been claimed earlier was held to be unsustainable.

Conclusion: The appellant was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 333/86-CE for the AR bricks, and the denial of exemption was set aside.

---