https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90499 Exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was held to attach to the manufacturer, so a shift of factory premises and later amendment or reissue of the SSI certificate did not, by itself, justify denial of the benefit. The turnover condition was not shown to be breached, and the interim period between shifting and formal amendment remained covered because the manufacturer had been availing the exemption in the preceding financial year and satisfied the relaxed registration condition in paragraph 4(b). The departmental appeals therefore failed and the exemption orders were sustained. en-us Fri, 12 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Oct 2011 17:32:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90499 Exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was held to attach to the manufacturer, so a shift of factory premises and later amendment or reissue of the SSI certificate did not, by itself, justify denial of the benefit. The turnover condition was not shown to be breached, and the interim period between shifting and formal amendment remained covered because the manufacturer had been availing the exemption in the preceding financial year and satisfied the relaxed registration condition in paragraph 4(b). The departmental appeals therefore failed and the exemption orders were sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 12 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90499