https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52929 Where two exemption notifications were simultaneously available, the assessee could adopt the more beneficial exemption and the Department could not compel a choice of only one. The later restrictive proviso inserted by Notification No. 22/95-C.E. was treated as a new condition and, absent express contrary language, could operate only prospectively. As the assessee had already availed Notification No. 22/94-C.E. for the relevant period before the amendment and had crossed the clearance limit before the restriction took effect, entitlement to the exemption was upheld and the order denying exemption was set aside. en-us Fri, 18 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Oct 2010 15:38:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52929 Where two exemption notifications were simultaneously available, the assessee could adopt the more beneficial exemption and the Department could not compel a choice of only one. The later restrictive proviso inserted by Notification No. 22/95-C.E. was treated as a new condition and, absent express contrary language, could operate only prospectively. As the assessee had already availed Notification No. 22/94-C.E. for the relevant period before the amendment and had crossed the clearance limit before the restriction took effect, entitlement to the exemption was upheld and the order denying exemption was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 18 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52929