Small-scale industry exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. remained available where registration was not cancelled and duty had to be reworked.

Small-scale industry registration remained valid because the registering authority had not cancelled it, and excise authorities could not deny Notification No. 175/86-C.E. merely for alleged non-compliance with filing requirements under another regime. The record also did not show that the unit had ceased to be a small-scale unit during the relevant period. On that basis, the exemption was available for the period in question, and the duty demand had to be re-quantified after giving effect to the notification benefit.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 175/86-C.E. on the basis of its small-scale industry registration, and whether the demand required re-quantification accordingly.

Analysis: The small-scale industries authority certified that the registration certificate remained permanently valid unless specifically cancelled and the certificate referred back to the original registration issued in 1973. No material showed cancellation by the registering authority, and the excise authorities could not deny the exemption merely because of an alleged non-compliance with filing requirements under another regime. The record also did not show that the unit had ceased to be a small-scale unit during the relevant period. Since the exemption was available, the duty demand had to be reworked by taking the notification benefit into account.

Conclusion: The appellant was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 175/86-C.E. for the relevant period, and the matter was sent back for re-quantification of duty, if any, after granting that benefit.

---