https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258192 A restoration notification for compounded rubber was treated as clarificatory because the earlier exemption was withdrawn and then promptly revived through a composite rescission exercise. On that reasoning, the exemption was regarded as continuing through the brief intervening period, since the surrounding policy showed no intent to levy duty in that interval. The result was that excise duty was not payable for the interregnum between withdrawal and restoration, and the demand was set aside in favour of the assessee. en-us Fri, 13 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Aug 2015 16:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258192 A restoration notification for compounded rubber was treated as clarificatory because the earlier exemption was withdrawn and then promptly revived through a composite rescission exercise. On that reasoning, the exemption was regarded as continuing through the brief intervening period, since the surrounding policy showed no intent to levy duty in that interval. The result was that excise duty was not payable for the interregnum between withdrawal and restoration, and the demand was set aside in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 13 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258192