https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46044 Fiscal exemption notifications must be construed strictly, and a merely modernised or expanded existing unit cannot be treated as a new factory unless the new arrangement is independent in all material respects. The Delhi HC held that the respondent-company's Nadikude kiln remained the same kiln operating since 1983, so the expanded unit did not qualify under Notification No. 36-C.E. dated 1-3-1987. It further held that Notification No. 124/87-C.E. required a clinkerisation unit to commence production within the specified period, which the Visakhapatnam and Vijayawada plants did not satisfy. The plea of hostile discrimination also failed because the comparators were factually different and mistaken benefits to others created no enforceable right to parity. en-us Mon, 06 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Jul 2010 14:16:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46044 Fiscal exemption notifications must be construed strictly, and a merely modernised or expanded existing unit cannot be treated as a new factory unless the new arrangement is independent in all material respects. The Delhi HC held that the respondent-company's Nadikude kiln remained the same kiln operating since 1983, so the expanded unit did not qualify under Notification No. 36-C.E. dated 1-3-1987. It further held that Notification No. 124/87-C.E. required a clinkerisation unit to commence production within the specified period, which the Visakhapatnam and Vijayawada plants did not satisfy. The plea of hostile discrimination also failed because the comparators were factually different and mistaken benefits to others created no enforceable right to parity. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 06 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46044