Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue has submitted that the appellants are claiming an exemption under the 2006 circular. That as held in a catena of decisions of this Court that an exemption notification has to be read as a whole. That an exception and/or an exemption provision in a taxing statute should be construed strictly and it is not open to the Court to ignore the conditions prescribed in an exemption notification. It is submitted that the exemption notification should be strictly construed and given meaning according to legislative intendment. It is contended that the Statutory provisions providing for exemption have to be interpreted in light of the words employed in them and there cannot be any addition or subtraction from the statutory provisions. It is further submitted that as per the law laid down by this honble Court in a catena of decisions in as taxing statute, it is the plain language of the provision that has to be preferred, where language is plain and is capable of determining a defined meaning. Strict interpretation to the provision is to be accorded to each case on hand. Now, in so far as the submission on behalf of the appellants that in the event of any doubt or any absurdity in a provision in a fiscal statute, construction favourable to the assessee should be adopted is concerned, it is submitted that the said principle shall not be applicable to construction of an exemption notification. It is urged that there is a vast difference and distinction between a charging provision in a taxing statute and an exemption notification and the same have to be borne in mind in the instant cases. It is submitted that in the present case, the language used in the exemption circular 2006 is very clear and unambiguous. have to be interpreted in light of the words employed in them and there cannot be any addition or subtraction from the statutory provisions. That an exception and or an exemption provision in a taxing statute should be construed strictly and it is not open to the Court.