ORDER
V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)
1. These two appeals are preferred by the Revenue against the order-in-appeal dated 24-2-1994 and 28-2-1994 involving the issue regarding availment of benefit of Notification No. 175/86 as amended by Notification No. 55/92 and No. 67/92. Both the Appeals are disposed of by one common order.
2. The Ld. SDR submitted that though both the Respondents M/s. Khanna Industries and M/s. Rajan Arts were not having certificates of SSI from the Director of Industries and they had exceeded the clearance value of Rs. 7.5 lakhs in preceding financial year they availed of the benefit of Notification No. 175/86 as amended by Notification No. 55/92. The Commissioner (Appeals) had allowed the benefit to both the Respondents observing that second proviso substituted by Notification No. 52/92, does not disentitle any of the Respondents from availing the benefit that this would disentitle them from availing of the Notification is terms of clause (a) of the proviso but they would still be eligible to avail the exemption under Clause (b) as they were availing the benefit of Notification No. 77/85 or any other SSI notification and it could be concluded that they were eligible to avail of the benefit of Notification No. 175/86 on strength of this, irrespective of value of clearance. The ld. SDRs submitted that the. Value of clearances in the preceding financial year had exceeded Rs. 7.5 lakhs in respect of both the respondents and they were not eligible for the benefit of the Notification during the period 1-4-1992 to 24-2-1992 in view of amendment made by Notification No: 55/92, dated 31-3-1992. They further submitted that Notification No. 67/92, dated 22-5-1992 is applicable from the date of issue and not retrospectively.
3. None was present on behalf of the respondents in spite of notices issued to them.
4.1 M/s. Rajan Arts have mentioned in their letter dated 4-9-1998 that they were availing SSI exemption under Notification No. 85/95 and have requested to decide the matter on merits. M/s. Khanna Petrochem Industries have submitted in their cross objection, that they were not hit by amending Notification No. 55/91 since they had availed of the exemption under Notification No. 77/85 and 8£/85. during 19,85^86 and based on which they had been allowed exemption under Notification No. 175/86; that they had never availed of the exemption in pursuance to Clause (a) to first proviso of Para 4 of Notification No. 175/86.
4.2 We have considered the submissions of the Revenue and perused the records and Cross Objection filed by. M/s. Khanna Petrochem Industries. The Notification No. 55/92 which substituted the second proviso in Para 4 of the Notification No. 175/86 reads as under :
“Provided further that nothing contained in Clause (b) of the first proviso shall apply in a case where a manufacturer who is manufacturing goods in a factory has availed of the exemption in pursuance of Clause (a) of the said proviso in any of the preceding financial years.”
4.3 Notification No. 175/86 was further amended by Notification No. 67/92, dated 22-5-1992 by which another proviso was inserted after the second proviso in Para 4 which reads as under :
“Provided also that nothing contained in the preceding proviso shall apply on and from 22nd day of May, 1992 to the 31st day of March, 1993.”
5. On reading of the paragraph 4 of Notification No. 175/86 along with proviso as amended from time to time, it is apparent that the benefit of Clause (b) of the first proviso to para 4 was not available to the units during the period from 1-4-1992 to 21-5-1992 by virtue of amendment made by Notification No. 55/92. The benefit of Clause (b) was restored by Notification No. 67/92, dated 22-5-1992 only with effect from 22-5-1992 and not for the period prior to that date. In view of the specific mention in the notification, there is no reason to give retrospective effect to the amendment caused by Notification No. 67/92. In view of these facts and circumstances, the Commissioner (Appeals) was not justified in extending the benefit of Notification No. 67/92 for the period from 1-4-1992 to 21-5-1992 and accordingly both the appeals of Revenue are allowed. The cross objection filed by M/s. Khanna Petrochem Industries is also disposed of in the above terms.