https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104494 The Tribunal held that, for availing Notification No. 175/86-C.E., clearances of different products could not be compulsorily reckoned in chronological order so as to carry an unutilised exemption limit from one product to another. It found that the contrary view had ceased to be governing law, and that the line of authority following EL.P.EM. Industries remained applicable. On that basis, the Revenue's interpretation was rejected, the assessee's claim to the notification benefit was accepted, and the adverse order was set aside with consequential relief where admissible. en-us Thu, 26 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Feb 2012 12:54:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104494 The Tribunal held that, for availing Notification No. 175/86-C.E., clearances of different products could not be compulsorily reckoned in chronological order so as to carry an unutilised exemption limit from one product to another. It found that the contrary view had ceased to be governing law, and that the line of authority following EL.P.EM. Industries remained applicable. On that basis, the Revenue's interpretation was rejected, the assessee's claim to the notification benefit was accepted, and the adverse order was set aside with consequential relief where admissible. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 26 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104494