https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40746 An exemption notification issued under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not be denied on the basis of departmental instructions issued under Rule 233 requiring the manufacturer to pass on the benefit to buyers or consumers, because the notification itself imposed no such condition. Rule 233 authorised only supplementary instructions and could not alter, abridge, or qualify a statutory exemption. The Court also held that the valuation provision in Section 4(4)(d)(ii) did not justify importing an additional condition into the exemption or treating the duty component in the manner suggested by the department. The denial of exemption was therefore unjustified. en-us Tue, 09 Oct 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 May 2017 17:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40746 An exemption notification issued under Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not be denied on the basis of departmental instructions issued under Rule 233 requiring the manufacturer to pass on the benefit to buyers or consumers, because the notification itself imposed no such condition. Rule 233 authorised only supplementary instructions and could not alter, abridge, or qualify a statutory exemption. The Court also held that the valuation provision in Section 4(4)(d)(ii) did not justify importing an additional condition into the exemption or treating the duty component in the manner suggested by the department. The denial of exemption was therefore unjustified. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 09 Oct 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40746