https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82594 An exemption under Notification No. 83/83-C.E. was unavailable because the turnover ceiling of Rs. 25 lakhs applied to clearances in the financial year for which relief was claimed, and the appellants' clearances exceeded that limit. In the absence of any allegation of suppression, the duty demand could be sustained only within the normal six-month limitation period, so it was confined to June to November 1984. As the benefit of Notification No. 83/83-C.E. failed, proviso 3 to Notification No. 74/78 did not bar the appellants, but their eligibility under provisos 1 and 2 required fresh examination by the original authority. en-us Tue, 28 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Jul 2011 12:11:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82594 An exemption under Notification No. 83/83-C.E. was unavailable because the turnover ceiling of Rs. 25 lakhs applied to clearances in the financial year for which relief was claimed, and the appellants' clearances exceeded that limit. In the absence of any allegation of suppression, the duty demand could be sustained only within the normal six-month limitation period, so it was confined to June to November 1984. As the benefit of Notification No. 83/83-C.E. failed, proviso 3 to Notification No. 74/78 did not bar the appellants, but their eligibility under provisos 1 and 2 required fresh examination by the original authority. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 28 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82594