1989 (7) TMI 125 - HC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of the effective date of a Notification for excise duty exemption.

Analysis:
The case involved writ appeals against a common order in three writ petitions concerning excise duty on cigarettes. The petitioner, a cigarette manufacturer, benefited from an exemption Notification dated 1-3-1979. However, a subsequent withdrawal Notification dated 30-11-1982 rescinded the earlier exemption. The petitioner contended that they were not aware of the withdrawal Notification until 8-12-1982, when it was made available for sale to the public. The petitioner sought a refund of the differential duty demanded for the period between 30-11-1982 and 5-12-1982. The court examined whether the withdrawal Notification could be enforced from the date it was made known to the public.

The respondents argued that once a Notification is published in the Gazette, it is presumed to have been given publicity on that date itself and becomes effective. However, the court held that a Notification must be made known to the public by making the Gazette available for sale to enforce it. Relying on precedents, the court emphasized that the availability of the Gazette for sale to the public is crucial for a Notification to take effect. The court found that in this case, the withdrawal Notification was made available for sale on 8-12-1982, and hence, it became effective only from that date.

The court referred to various judgments, including one from the Calcutta High Court, emphasizing that a Notification must be published and made known to the public to be enforceable. It cited cases where Notifications were held to be effective only from the date they were made available for sale to the public. As the withdrawal Notification was not known to the public during the period in question, the court ruled in favor of the petitioner, directing a refund of the duty collected during that period. Consequently, the orders in all three writ petitions were upheld.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the appeals, granting costs to the petitioners. The interim order for refund was confirmed, and the court reaffirmed that the withdrawal Notification was effective only from 8-12-1982, entitling the petitioners to the benefit of the earlier exemption Notification for the relevant period.