https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349183 The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the Order-in-Appeal confirming the demand of interest of Rs. 64,573. The appellant's claim for benefit under Notification No.9/2003-CE was denied as they exceeded the limit for the preceding financial year, making them ineligible. The Tribunal ruled that the benefit of a notification should not be applied retrospectively unless specified, citing a Kerala High Court judgment. Consequently, the appellant was not entitled to the benefit retrospectively, and the impugned order was sustained. en-us Wed, 30 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Oct 2017 11:23:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349183 The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the Order-in-Appeal confirming the demand of interest of Rs. 64,573. The appellant's claim for benefit under Notification No.9/2003-CE was denied as they exceeded the limit for the preceding financial year, making them ineligible. The Tribunal ruled that the benefit of a notification should not be applied retrospectively unless specified, citing a Kerala High Court judgment. Consequently, the appellant was not entitled to the benefit retrospectively, and the impugned order was sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 30 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349183