https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167577 An incentive notification that repeatedly used the term "clearances" had to be applied according to its plain language, even though the broader scheme referred generally to increased production. The governing comparison was therefore between clearances in the base year and clearances in the incentive year, not production levels. Temporary closure, lay-off of labour, or absence of production for part of the period did not by itself defeat eligibility where raw materials were received and clearances were made during that time. The scheme thus operated on clearances rather than production, and the assessee remained entitled to the incentive. en-us Sat, 30 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Dec 2014 11:49:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167577 An incentive notification that repeatedly used the term "clearances" had to be applied according to its plain language, even though the broader scheme referred generally to increased production. The governing comparison was therefore between clearances in the base year and clearances in the incentive year, not production levels. Temporary closure, lay-off of labour, or absence of production for part of the period did not by itself defeat eligibility where raw materials were received and clearances were made during that time. The scheme thus operated on clearances rather than production, and the assessee remained entitled to the incentive. Case-Laws Central Excise Sat, 30 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167577