Sugar rebate entitlement extends despite nil prior production where the amended notification broadens the exemption benefit.

Rebate under the sugar exemption notifications was not dependent on proving production in each preceding sugar year as a strict condition precedent. The amended notification was read as expanding the benefit where earlier sugar years had nil production, so the rebate could not be refused merely because the factory had not produced sugar during those years. On that reasoning, rebate under Notification No. 132/82 was treated as admissible to the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the absence of a factory during the preceding sugar years disqualified the assessee from rebate under the relevant exemption notifications, and whether the amended notification extended the benefit despite nil production in the preceding years.

Analysis: The entitlement to rebate under the notifications was held not to depend on the existence of production in each of the preceding years as a condition precedent. The amendment to the notification was also taken into account as widening the benefit where production during the earlier sugar years was nil. On that basis, the benefit could not be denied merely because the factory had not produced sugar in each of the preceding years.

Conclusion: The issue was decided in favour of the assessee, and rebate under Notification No. 132/82 was held admissible.

---