https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82164 A restrictive exemption amendment under Notification No. 55/92-C.E. was treated as not applying to the disputed period because the later amending Notification No. 67/92-C.E. deferred the amended proviso and the Board's trade notices clarified that the earlier exemption position stood restored for unregistered units under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. The combined effect of the amendment and clarification meant the denial of exemption for the covered period was unsustainable, and the assessee was entitled to the benefit. en-us Wed, 30 Sep 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Jul 2011 13:13:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82164 A restrictive exemption amendment under Notification No. 55/92-C.E. was treated as not applying to the disputed period because the later amending Notification No. 67/92-C.E. deferred the amended proviso and the Board's trade notices clarified that the earlier exemption position stood restored for unregistered units under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. The combined effect of the amendment and clarification meant the denial of exemption for the covered period was unsustainable, and the assessee was entitled to the benefit. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 30 Sep 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82164