https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51362 The appeal was dismissed as lacking merit, with the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order upheld, denying exemption benefits for additional excise duty to the textile fabric manufacturers. The interpretation of Notification No. 1/93, dated 28-2-93, clarified that exemptions under Rule 8(1) of the Central Excise Rules do not cover additional duties, as per the Apex Court's ruling in Union of India v. Modi Rubber. Legal precedents highlighted that exemptions for basic excise duty do not extend to goods liable to additional excise duty, leading to the denial of the appellants' claim for exemption from additional excise duty. en-us Mon, 22 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Sep 2010 13:09:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51362 The appeal was dismissed as lacking merit, with the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order upheld, denying exemption benefits for additional excise duty to the textile fabric manufacturers. The interpretation of Notification No. 1/93, dated 28-2-93, clarified that exemptions under Rule 8(1) of the Central Excise Rules do not cover additional duties, as per the Apex Court's ruling in Union of India v. Modi Rubber. Legal precedents highlighted that exemptions for basic excise duty do not extend to goods liable to additional excise duty, leading to the denial of the appellants' claim for exemption from additional excise duty. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 22 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51362