https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439527 The Tribunal held that the appellants were entitled to the benefit of Notification No.108/95-CE as the conditions were met, allowing exemption for tippers used in a road construction project. The retrospective application of Explanation-2 to the Notification was rejected, preventing duty demand from the appellants. The extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable as the appellants had complied with reporting requirements. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief. en-us Fri, 02 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Jun 2023 18:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439527 The Tribunal held that the appellants were entitled to the benefit of Notification No.108/95-CE as the conditions were met, allowing exemption for tippers used in a road construction project. The retrospective application of Explanation-2 to the Notification was rejected, preventing duty demand from the appellants. The extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable as the appellants had complied with reporting requirements. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 02 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439527