https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40782 For determining the base period under Notification No. 198/76-C.E., paragraph 1(b) governed exclusions from excess-clearance computation and did not control base-period fixing under paragraph 2. The plain language of paragraph 2 did not require that the first clearance be duty-paid, and the notification scheme allowed even duty-free clearances to be relevant in identifying the base period and comparing excess production or clearances. The base period was therefore upheld as determined by the lower authorities, and the revision was rejected. en-us Wed, 27 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 May 2010 16:55:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40782 For determining the base period under Notification No. 198/76-C.E., paragraph 1(b) governed exclusions from excess-clearance computation and did not control base-period fixing under paragraph 2. The plain language of paragraph 2 did not require that the first clearance be duty-paid, and the notification scheme allowed even duty-free clearances to be relevant in identifying the base period and comparing excess production or clearances. The base period was therefore upheld as determined by the lower authorities, and the revision was rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40782