Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the respondent was entitled to area based exemption under Notification No. 49/2003 on the ground that it had achieved substantial expansion by increasing installed capacity by more than 25%.
Analysis: The increased installed capacity was certified by technical experts. The dispute turned on whether such expansion had to be achieved only by addition of new plant and machinery. The circular dated 21.1.2004 and the applicable exemption notification were read to mean that the determinative factor is the fact of substantial expansion itself. The use of replacement material, consumables, renovation, modification, or modernisation of existing machinery was held not to exclude the benefit where the capacity increase was actually achieved.
Conclusion: The respondent satisfied the requirement of substantial expansion and was entitled to the area based exemption.
Final Conclusion: The Revenue's challenge failed because the exemption could not be denied merely on the ground that the capacity increase resulted from alterations or replacement-based improvements in the existing plant and machinery.
Ratio Decidendi: For area based exemption linked to substantial expansion, the decisive test is whether installed capacity has in fact increased by the prescribed percentage; the benefit is not confined to cases where the increase results only from wholly new plant and machinery.