https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41916 A sugar incentive notification granting rebate on production in excess of the corresponding period of the previous year was construed as an incentive measure, so nil production in that earlier corresponding period did not by itself bar the rebate if the factory had worked during the base period and the notification's conditions were otherwise met. On recovery, the view stated was that the matter fell under Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 rather than Rule 10A. The demand, show-cause notice, and orders withdrawing the rebate were quashed, and the assessee's claim succeeded. en-us Mon, 24 Jun 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Jun 2010 18:54:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41916 A sugar incentive notification granting rebate on production in excess of the corresponding period of the previous year was construed as an incentive measure, so nil production in that earlier corresponding period did not by itself bar the rebate if the factory had worked during the base period and the notification's conditions were otherwise met. On recovery, the view stated was that the matter fell under Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 rather than Rule 10A. The demand, show-cause notice, and orders withdrawing the rebate were quashed, and the assessee's claim succeeded. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 24 Jun 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41916