https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72176 An exemption under Notification No. 226/77 as amended by Notification No. 323/77 required prior Government approval as an independent processor before concessional duty could be claimed. Because the approval process began only after the relevant period, and there was no material showing that approval had been obtained or even sought during that period, the exemption could not be applied retrospectively. The argument that later approval related back to the date of amendment was rejected, as the concession could not operate before the statutory condition precedent was satisfied. The exemption was therefore unavailable for the material period, and the differential duty demand was sustained. en-us Thu, 09 Jan 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 May 2011 18:49:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72176 An exemption under Notification No. 226/77 as amended by Notification No. 323/77 required prior Government approval as an independent processor before concessional duty could be claimed. Because the approval process began only after the relevant period, and there was no material showing that approval had been obtained or even sought during that period, the exemption could not be applied retrospectively. The argument that later approval related back to the date of amendment was rejected, as the concession could not operate before the statutory condition precedent was satisfied. The exemption was therefore unavailable for the material period, and the differential duty demand was sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 09 Jan 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72176