https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43530 Ultramarine blue remained within the exemption under the 16 December 1991 notification where the product, falling under the relevant tariff sub-heading, had already suffered duty at the bulk stage. The court treated the petitioner's undisputed payment of duty on the bulk goods as sufficient to attract the exemption, and therefore found it unnecessary to decide whether subsequent packing into smaller packets constituted manufacture. The stated principle was that, where the factual process is unchanged and the legal position remains the same, the pre-notification and post-notification periods need not be treated differently. On that basis, the exemption was held to operate in favour of the petitioner. en-us Tue, 21 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:50:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43530 Ultramarine blue remained within the exemption under the 16 December 1991 notification where the product, falling under the relevant tariff sub-heading, had already suffered duty at the bulk stage. The court treated the petitioner's undisputed payment of duty on the bulk goods as sufficient to attract the exemption, and therefore found it unnecessary to decide whether subsequent packing into smaller packets constituted manufacture. The stated principle was that, where the factual process is unchanged and the legal position remains the same, the pre-notification and post-notification periods need not be treated differently. On that basis, the exemption was held to operate in favour of the petitioner. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 21 Jul 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43530