https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123227 Entitlement to exemption under Notification No. 175/86 depended on clause (b) of para 4 of the first proviso, which was treated as a distinct basis from the SSI registration condition and the preceding year's clearance value limit. The appellate authority found that the claim fell within clause (b), and the later amending Notification No. 55/92 did not affect that claim. As the Revenue did not dispute applicability of clause (b), the absence of small scale industry registration and excess clearance value were held irrelevant to the exemption claimed. The respondent was therefore entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 175/86. en-us Thu, 17 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Sep 2012 15:06:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123227 Entitlement to exemption under Notification No. 175/86 depended on clause (b) of para 4 of the first proviso, which was treated as a distinct basis from the SSI registration condition and the preceding year's clearance value limit. The appellate authority found that the claim fell within clause (b), and the later amending Notification No. 55/92 did not affect that claim. As the Revenue did not dispute applicability of clause (b), the absence of small scale industry registration and excess clearance value were held irrelevant to the exemption claimed. The respondent was therefore entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 175/86. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 17 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123227