https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111788 The appeals were allowed, and the impugned orders were set aside. The appellant was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 82/92-C.E. during the disputed period, regardless of the transition from Free Trade Zone to Special Economic Zone. The demand for duty was not justified as the legal framework did not support it for the period before the amendment of Section 3 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. en-us Thu, 20 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Apr 2012 12:32:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111788 The appeals were allowed, and the impugned orders were set aside. The appellant was entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 82/92-C.E. during the disputed period, regardless of the transition from Free Trade Zone to Special Economic Zone. The demand for duty was not justified as the legal framework did not support it for the period before the amendment of Section 3 of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 20 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111788