https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50101 Exemption notifications for cement concrete blocks and capital goods were read liberally where the wording supported the claim. For Notification No. 36/94, goods manufactured at a pre-cast yard for use in construction were treated as covered by the expression "manufactured at the site of construction", so denial of benefit was not justified. For Notification No. 67/95, capital goods manufactured in a factory and used within the factory of production were held to fall within the notification's scope, so denial of exemption was not justified. The stated approach was that a narrow location-based reading should not defeat the intended exemption where the language permits relief. en-us Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Aug 2010 17:17:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50101 Exemption notifications for cement concrete blocks and capital goods were read liberally where the wording supported the claim. For Notification No. 36/94, goods manufactured at a pre-cast yard for use in construction were treated as covered by the expression "manufactured at the site of construction", so denial of benefit was not justified. For Notification No. 67/95, capital goods manufactured in a factory and used within the factory of production were held to fall within the notification's scope, so denial of exemption was not justified. The stated approach was that a narrow location-based reading should not defeat the intended exemption where the language permits relief. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50101