9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 338X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 (6) TMI 218 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM] on this issue has clearly held that applicability of benefit of Notification is to be made with effect from the date on which the subject Notification comes into force. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in this case has held that the Tribunal or even the High Court has no power to grant retrospective benefit of the Notification in the interpretation process, unless it is so provided in the Notification itself. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - E/249/2008-DB - Final Order No. 21808 / 2017 - Dated:- 30-8-2017 - Shri S. S. Garg, Judicial Member And Shri Ashok K. Arya, Technical Member Mr. M.A. Narayana, Advocate For the Appellant Mr. N. Jagadish, AR For the Responde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (iv) Thereafter, the appellant paid differential duty of ₹ 6,40,000/-. (v) The appellant pleads that the Notification No.9/2003 was amended later and the demand is not sustainable; that they paid the duty amount on 30.1.2004 out of ignorance. However, the said amount has been collected by the appellant from his customers based on the certificate issued by the Department. (vi) Later, the Department conducted audit during September 2005 and observed that there was a delay in payment of said duty of Central Excise, therefore, demanded payment of interest. (vii) The Department issued show-cause notice (SCN) demanding an amount of ₹ 64,573/-. (viii) The show-cause notice (SCN) was adjudicated by the Deputy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only prospectively and therefore, the benefit of notification granted to respondents by the Tribunal retrospectively from the beginning of the financial year is illegal and arbitrary. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents contended that exemption is with reference to previous year s turnover and when Annexure-B Notification was issued excluding the value of clearances made on job work basis on the turnover, respondents are entitled to have concession/exemption under Notification No. 9/03 and the basis of liability under the Notification though changed by Annexure-B Notification dated 11-8-2003, it applies from 1-4-2003 onwards. He has also referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Mangalore Chemicals Fertilizers Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) will come into force on the date of it s issue. Since Annexure-B Notification amending Annexure-A Notification does not provide for retrospectivity, it comes into force on the date of issue, namely 11-8-03, as provided under Clause (5)(a) to Section 5A of the Central Excise Act. In fact, this means that respondents are not entitled to benefit of amendment to Annexure-A Notification (No. 9/03) up to 10-8-2003 and are liable to pay duty at normal rate for clearances made up to that date. However, by virtue of exclusion of job work turnover provided under Annexure-B Notification issued on 11-8-03 respondents will be entitled to benefit of amended Annexure-A Notification with effect from the date on which it was amended vide Annexure-B Notifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
