https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50174 Notification No. 138/86-C.E. was interpreted to mean that entitlement to the first slab depended on clearances from the point of valid election to the notification, but prior clearances under another concessional notification could still be counted where the slab limit had already been exhausted before the option was exercised. On the facts, the assessee had already removed the goods in excess of the relevant threshold before shifting to Notification No. 138/86-C.E., so the first slab benefit was unavailable from the date of opting. The department's view prevailed. en-us Thu, 16 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Aug 2010 11:45:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50174 Notification No. 138/86-C.E. was interpreted to mean that entitlement to the first slab depended on clearances from the point of valid election to the notification, but prior clearances under another concessional notification could still be counted where the slab limit had already been exhausted before the option was exercised. On the facts, the assessee had already removed the goods in excess of the relevant threshold before shifting to Notification No. 138/86-C.E., so the first slab benefit was unavailable from the date of opting. The department's view prevailed. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 16 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50174