https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44391 An adjudicatory authority cannot deny an exemption on a ground different from the one consistently pleaded by the Revenue and contested by the assessee. The exemption notification under Rule 8(1) covered prepared or preserved foods falling under Item 1B of the First Schedule, subject to specified exclusions. The Revenue's pleaded case was that the product was a starch-based preparation outside the exemption, but the Tribunal rejected that basis and instead treated it as flour-based. That approach was beyond competence because a fiscal demand cannot be sustained on a case never made by the Revenue. Once the pleaded ground failed, the assessee was entitled to the exemption and relief. en-us Tue, 29 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Oct 2025 18:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44391 An adjudicatory authority cannot deny an exemption on a ground different from the one consistently pleaded by the Revenue and contested by the assessee. The exemption notification under Rule 8(1) covered prepared or preserved foods falling under Item 1B of the First Schedule, subject to specified exclusions. The Revenue's pleaded case was that the product was a starch-based preparation outside the exemption, but the Tribunal rejected that basis and instead treated it as flour-based. That approach was beyond competence because a fiscal demand cannot be sustained on a case never made by the Revenue. Once the pleaded ground failed, the assessee was entitled to the exemption and relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 29 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44391