https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107983 Notification No. 33/99-C.E. was construed as requiring an overall increase of 25% in the installed capacity of the factory, not a section-wise increase in each part of the unit. On that reading, denial of the exemption for failure to achieve 25% expansion in every separate section was unjustified. The Tribunal noted that an identical issue had already been decided in favour of the assessee, and the notification benefit was therefore correctly extended; the Revenue's objection failed. en-us Wed, 17 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Mar 2012 12:10:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107983 Notification No. 33/99-C.E. was construed as requiring an overall increase of 25% in the installed capacity of the factory, not a section-wise increase in each part of the unit. On that reading, denial of the exemption for failure to achieve 25% expansion in every separate section was unjustified. The Tribunal noted that an identical issue had already been decided in favour of the assessee, and the notification benefit was therefore correctly extended; the Revenue's objection failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 17 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107983