https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90840 Prima facie, reinforced cement concrete girders manufactured at a bridge construction site were treated as excisable goods, so the duty demand was not subject to waiver of pre-deposit. The argument that Notification No. 51/95 merely clarified Notification No. 36/94 and operated retrospectively was not accepted at that stage, because the later notification appeared to introduce material changes to the earlier exemption. Manufacture pursuant to a bridge construction contract did not, by itself, negate duty liability. Penalty under Section 11AC was, however, found inapplicable prima facie because the goods were manufactured before that provision came into force, so pre-deposit of the penalty and redemption fine was waived and their recovery stayed on deposit of the duty demanded. en-us Thu, 21 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:35:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90840 Prima facie, reinforced cement concrete girders manufactured at a bridge construction site were treated as excisable goods, so the duty demand was not subject to waiver of pre-deposit. The argument that Notification No. 51/95 merely clarified Notification No. 36/94 and operated retrospectively was not accepted at that stage, because the later notification appeared to introduce material changes to the earlier exemption. Manufacture pursuant to a bridge construction contract did not, by itself, negate duty liability. Penalty under Section 11AC was, however, found inapplicable prima facie because the goods were manufactured before that provision came into force, so pre-deposit of the penalty and redemption fine was waived and their recovery stayed on deposit of the duty demanded. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 21 Jan 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90840