https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97394 Under the later sugar exemption notifications, nil-production periods in preceding sugar years had to be excluded when computing average sugar production. The wording of Notifications Nos. 132/82 and 135/83 was treated as materially different from the earlier Notification No. 146/74: whereas the earlier notification allowed exclusion only where an entire sugar year had no production, the later notifications required the corresponding nil-production periods to be ignored for average calculation. The appellants' method of counting those nil-production periods in the divisor was rejected, and the correct interpretation was that only productive periods were to be used in the average. en-us Tue, 14 Jun 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Jan 2012 15:12:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97394 Under the later sugar exemption notifications, nil-production periods in preceding sugar years had to be excluded when computing average sugar production. The wording of Notifications Nos. 132/82 and 135/83 was treated as materially different from the earlier Notification No. 146/74: whereas the earlier notification allowed exclusion only where an entire sugar year had no production, the later notifications required the corresponding nil-production periods to be ignored for average calculation. The appellants' method of counting those nil-production periods in the divisor was rejected, and the correct interpretation was that only productive periods were to be used in the average. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 14 Jun 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97394