9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 1384X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the former notification applies to the pan masala containing tobacco whereas the notification dated 25-4-2007 relates to pan masala without tobacco, we are of the opinion that the ratio of the decision rendered by the Division Bench would be squarely applicable even in the facts of this appeal and will be binding upon this Court. The respondents are directed to refund the Excise duty component to the appellant as per its entitlement under the law - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der the Notification Nos. 32/99-C.E. and 33/99-C.E., were withdrawn on 31-12-1999 only to be restored again by a separate Notification No. 45/99-C.E. issued on 17-1-2000. From the period in between 17-1-2000 to 21-1-2004 several notifications had been issued by the Central Excise Department withdrawing the benefit upon the tobacco products including cigarette and thereafter again partially restoring the same until such time Notification No. 8/2004-C.E., dated 21-1-2004 was issued permitting exemption of 100% excise duty in respect of tobacco products including chewing tobacco, subject to the condition that the exempted amount shall be invested by the manufacturers in the plant and machinery in a manufacturing unit located in the northeastern region as well as in infrastructure or civil work or social work in those States. However, the withdrawal of exemption in respect of cigarette attained finality once the constitutional validity of the Section 154 of the Finance Act, 2003 was upheld by the Supreme Court in the case of R.C. Tobacco (P) Ltd. v. Union of India, (2007) 5 SCC 725. In this manner the Central Govt. had restored the exemption granted under the Notification No. 32/99-C.E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons were included in the negative list and in view of the fact that the policy of 2007 has not been assailed by the writ petitioners, the Central Govt. was not estopped from revoking the exemption granted earlier since the recourse was taken by following the warrant of public interest. 7. The common judgment and order dated 10-12-2010 was taken in an appeal by the present appellant in the W.A. No. 81/2011 which was allowed by the Division Bench of this Court by the judgment and order dated 20-4-2016. In the judgment dated 20-4-2016 passed in W.A. No. 81/2011 the Division Bench has held that the notification impugned therein i.e. No. 11/2007-C.E. was hit by the doctrine of promissory estoppels and was not sustainable in law. The observations of the Division Bench made in the judgment and order dated 20-4-2016 are quoted herein below for ready reference :- "26. Thus, in our opinion, prima facie, the impugned Notification No. 11/2007-C.E. is hit by the doctrine of promissory estoppels for the following reasons : (a) By the North East Industrial Policy, 1997 implemented by the Notifications No. 32/99-C.E. and No. 33/99-C.E., a promise was held out by the respondent authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eriod between the Notification No. 69/2003, dated 25-8-2003 and the Notification No. 8/2004-C.E., dated 21-1-2004 which is known as pre-escrow period, the appellant is shown to have invested ₹ 100 crores out of which only an amount of ₹ 34 crores was certified by the Investment Appraisal Committee to have been invested and (ii) the Industrial Policy Resolution dated 1-4-2007 issued by the Ministry of Industry and Commerce inserted negative list which included tobacco products and pan masala enabling the withdrawal of these two items from tax exemption with retrospective effect in public interest taking into account health hazard and various other factors. 28. Insofar as the impact of negative list is concerned, there is no difficulty in holding that these two items are still entitled to exemption inasmuch as towards the end of the North East Industrial and Investment Promotion Policy, 2007 (NEIP, 2007) i.e. Clause 2, it is clearly provided that industrial units which had commenced commercial production on or before 31-3-2007 will continue to get benefits/incentives under the NEIP, 1997 notwithstanding the inclusion of tobacco products and pan masala among the nega ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
