Exemption notifications for cement clearances can apply successively where the later benefit does not cover goods already exempted earlier.

A cement manufacturer that had already taken exemption under Notification No. 1/93-CE for earlier clearances could still claim Notification No. 12/95-CE for subsequent clearances in the same year. The proviso to Notification No. 12/95-CE was read as excluding only the cement consignments that had already enjoyed the earlier exemption, not as barring the manufacturer from using the later notification for other clearances not covered by Notification No. 1/93-CE. The Revenue's view that both notifications could not be availed in the same year was rejected, and the refund claim for the later exemption was held maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether a cement manufacturer who had already availed exemption under Notification No. 1/93-CE dated 28.02.1993 for clearances up to Rs. 50 lakhs could also claim the benefit of Notification No. 12/95-CE dated 16.03.1995 for subsequent clearances in the same year.

Analysis: The proviso to Notification No. 12/95-CE excluded cement in respect of which the manufacturer availed the exemption under Notification No. 1/93-CE. The exclusion operated at the level of the particular consignment of cement that had already enjoyed the earlier exemption, and did not bar the manufacturer from claiming the later notification for subsequent clearances not covered by the earlier exemption. The Revenue's objection that both notifications could not be availed in the same year was rejected as inconsistent with the wording and object of the proviso.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 12/95-CE for the subsequent clearances, and the refund claim was maintainable.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue's challenge to the refund was rejected, and the assessee's entitlement to the later exemption notification was upheld.

---