9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 1274X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e amendment by substitution has been given retrospective step rather the notification dated May 5, 1997 in specific and unequivocally terms recites that the amendment which is being made in the notification dated March 31, 1995 shall come into effect from the date of publication of the notification in the gazette. The said notification in the gazette was admittedly published on May 5, 1997. Therefore, when the notification itself provides for the date of applicability of the aforesaid notification no retrospectivity to it can be attributed so as to apply it from the effective date of Notification No. 781 dated March 31, 1995. Therefore, the Tribunal as such is not justified in holding that the amendment would be operative from April 1, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... certificate under section 4A of the U. P. Act in respect to the expansion and the date of production and the first sale happens to be before May 5, 1997. Under the Notification No. 781 dated March 31, 1995 issued under section 8 of the Central Act the assessee-revisionist was entitle to exemption/ rebate on the tax for the first 10 years of the production/sale as prescribed in annexure-1 to the said notification. Column 4 of annexure 1 to the said notification provides that the exemption or reduction in the rate of tax on any transaction of sale shall not exceed five per cent of the sale price and it shall be as percentage of the rate of tax normally applicable under the U. P. Act. In view of the clear recitals in column 4 annexure 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the heading, in column 4 for the words 'under the U. P. Act' the words 'under the Act' shall be substituted ; The short question which has been raised in this revision is whether the amendment made by the aforesaid notification dated May 5, 1997 is applicable from the said date itself or it would operate retrospectively from the date of the issuance of the notification amended, i.e., Notification 781 dated May 31, 1995. The Tribunal in passing the impugned order has refused the benefit of exemption/reduction in tax to the assessee revisionist for the relevant year 1997-98 on the ground that the use of the word U. P. Act in column 4 of annexure 1 to the notification dated March 31, 1995 appears to be a clerical mista ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umed that there was some mistake in the notification dated March 31, 1995, the said mistake cannot be taken note of. The mistake if any as suggested by the Tribunal was corrected by the notification dated May 5, 1997 and the said mistake would stand rectified from the date of publication of the subsequent notification and would not relate back to the notification dated March 31, 1995. In view of the aforesaid discussion the question formulated above is answered in favour of the assessee revisionist and against the Department and it is held that the amendment to the notification dated March 31, 1995 brought about by means of the notification dated May 5, 1997 shall be effective from May 5, 1997 and would not apply retrospectively with eff ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
