https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89381 Processing of calendered cotton fabrics with a Zero Zero Machine without a stenter attachment was treated as calendering, not shrink-proofing, for excise purposes. The explanatory amendment describing such finishing as calendering was accepted as clarificatory rather than prospective, so the departmental argument on limited future operation failed. On that basis, the earlier Tribunal view was followed and the processing was held not to bring the goods within the excise net. en-us Mon, 05 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Sep 2011 16:33:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89381 Processing of calendered cotton fabrics with a Zero Zero Machine without a stenter attachment was treated as calendering, not shrink-proofing, for excise purposes. The explanatory amendment describing such finishing as calendering was accepted as clarificatory rather than prospective, so the departmental argument on limited future operation failed. On that basis, the earlier Tribunal view was followed and the processing was held not to bring the goods within the excise net. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 05 Oct 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89381