9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (6) TMI 156X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Jai Narayanan Nair, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. At the outset, the counsel for the appellants represented that the arguments in E/A 3102/84-D cover the arguments in two other appeals, namely E/2118/85-D and E/2119/85-D which were transferred from the Southern Regional Bench. On the basis of his representation, we proceed to pass a common order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the notification did not operate with retrospective effect. 4. We have heard Shri J.V. Suryanarayanan, for the appellants and Shri Jai Narayanan Nair for the respondents. 5. This Tribunal in the case of Gangapur S.S.K. Ltd. v. C. C.E. Aurangabad [1988 (33) E.L.T. 505), has held, while interpreting Notification 193/82-C.E., dated 11-6-1982 that retrospectivity if any, must be gathered, if suc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the clear intention of the legislature in issuing the notification is to give retrospective effect. In support of this contention, he cites before us the judgment of the Supreme Court in AIR 1970 S.C. 385 (Income-Tax Officer, Alleppey v. M.C. Ponnoose Others) and draws our attention in particular to para 5 of the judgment, which according to the advocate, infers that, there is no bar on retrospe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts will not, therefore, ascribe retrospectivity to new laws, affecting rights unless by express words or necessary implication it appears that such was the intention of the legislature. The Parliament can delegate its legislative power within the recognised limits. Where any rule or regulation is made by any person or authority to whom such powers have been delegated by the legislature it may or m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
