https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362047 A unit located at village Derathu was treated as falling within a rural area for exemption under Notification No. 8/2003-CE because the notification excluded only units situated within a municipal committee, municipal corporation, town area committee, cantonment board or notified area committee. The accepted factual position was that the village lay beyond the cantonment periphery, and the clear language of Rule 5(H) did not permit any additional peripheral area to be read into the exclusion. On that plain-text construction, the exemption was available, and the demand and penalties were not sustainable. en-us Mon, 28 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Jun 2018 09:26:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362047 A unit located at village Derathu was treated as falling within a rural area for exemption under Notification No. 8/2003-CE because the notification excluded only units situated within a municipal committee, municipal corporation, town area committee, cantonment board or notified area committee. The accepted factual position was that the village lay beyond the cantonment periphery, and the clear language of Rule 5(H) did not permit any additional peripheral area to be read into the exclusion. On that plain-text construction, the exemption was available, and the demand and penalties were not sustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 28 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362047