https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40672 The exemption under Notification No. 161/71-C.E. depended on proof that at least 50 per cent of the loose tea manufactured during the relevant three-year period was actually sold in public auction and that the average price realised from those auction sales was below the prescribed limit. Quantities used as tea samples or later sold by private negotiation could not be treated as public-auction sales for computing either the qualifying percentage or the average sale price. The notification had to be applied according to its express terms, and its scope could not be enlarged by including sales made otherwise than at public auction. The exemption claim was therefore rejected and the appellate order was upheld. en-us Tue, 17 Jul 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 May 2010 11:51:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40672 The exemption under Notification No. 161/71-C.E. depended on proof that at least 50 per cent of the loose tea manufactured during the relevant three-year period was actually sold in public auction and that the average price realised from those auction sales was below the prescribed limit. Quantities used as tea samples or later sold by private negotiation could not be treated as public-auction sales for computing either the qualifying percentage or the average sale price. The notification had to be applied according to its express terms, and its scope could not be enlarged by including sales made otherwise than at public auction. The exemption claim was therefore rejected and the appellate order was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 17 Jul 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40672