https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259415 Exemption under Notification No. 30/2004-CE was held available where a manufacturer processed filament yarns procured from outside and did not have factory facilities for manufacturing filament yarns of Chapter 54. The tribunal applied the Central Excise law conditions governing eligibility and rejected reliance on definitions from other enactments to alter the notification test. On limitation, the extended period could not be invoked because the record showed a general trade practice of claiming the benefit and no proved suppression or mala fide intent. The demand was therefore treated as time-barred, and the appeals were allowed. en-us Wed, 06 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Feb 2016 18:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259415 Exemption under Notification No. 30/2004-CE was held available where a manufacturer processed filament yarns procured from outside and did not have factory facilities for manufacturing filament yarns of Chapter 54. The tribunal applied the Central Excise law conditions governing eligibility and rejected reliance on definitions from other enactments to alter the notification test. On limitation, the extended period could not be invoked because the record showed a general trade practice of claiming the benefit and no proved suppression or mala fide intent. The demand was therefore treated as time-barred, and the appeals were allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 06 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259415