https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40593 An exemption notification under Rule 8(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was applied on the basis of the actual "rubber component" in the goods, and the authorities had already granted exemption on that footing. The later superseding notification did not state that it was retrospective or corrective, so it could not be used to create excise liability for removals made during the earlier notification period. Treating "rubber component" as equivalent to "rubber compound" was therefore unsustainable, and the demand based on that reinterpretation was set aside. en-us Tue, 27 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 May 2010 15:56:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40593 An exemption notification under Rule 8(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was applied on the basis of the actual "rubber component" in the goods, and the authorities had already granted exemption on that footing. The later superseding notification did not state that it was retrospective or corrective, so it could not be used to create excise liability for removals made during the earlier notification period. Treating "rubber component" as equivalent to "rubber compound" was therefore unsustainable, and the demand based on that reinterpretation was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 27 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40593