9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (5) TMI 872X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 982) were taken away by the subsequent Notification dated 21-10-1982. 2. In order to appreciate the controversy involved in the case, we deem it appropriate to set out the relevant portion of the Notification dated 23-4-1980, as amended by the Notification dated 5-6-1982 and Notification dated 21-10-1982. Notification dated 23-4-80 as amended on 5-6-82 "Exemption to Caprolactum. - In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the Department of Revenue and Banking No. 117-Customs, dated the 1st July, 1977, the Central Government, being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts capro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ication dated 21-10-1982 was not issued in the public interest. Mr. Haksar also fairly conceded that the Government has powers to issue the subsequent Notification, but there has to be public interest in issuance of the same. Mr. Haksar submitted that the respondents have not demonstrated any public interest in issuance of the subsequent Notification by which the benefits granted in the first Notification were partially withdrawn. According to him, the Central Government is under an obligation to give reasons for issuance of such a Notification. He also submitted that in this case no reasons are forthcoming. Therefore, there is no basis for the formation of the opinion and it should be assumed that the subsequent Notification was not issued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nk guarantee to the extent, of 50% of the disputed amount of money;" 6. By the order dated 8-11-1982 the petitioners were granted permission to amend the writ petition. It may be pertinent to mention that though the respondents were served and the learned Counsel for the respondents appeared in Court as early as on 31-8-1982, but despite number of opportunities the counter affidavit was not filed by the respondents within a period of 20 long years. This clearly shows total apathy and indifference of the respondents in dealing with even the revenue matters where the stakes run into crores of Rupees of public money. On 15-4-2002 this Court was constrained to pass the following order :- "It is unfortunate that no counter affidavit has b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a & Co. v. The Union of India and Others - 1999 (110) E.L.T. 419 (S.C.) = (1973) 2 SCC 617. He has particularly drawn our attention to Para 16 of the judgment which reads as under :- "16. Policies of imports or exports are fashioned not only with reference to internal or international trade but also on monetary policy, the development of agriculture and industries and even on the political policies of the country but rival theories and views may be held on such policies. If the Government decides an economic policy that import or export should be by a selected channel or through selected agencies the Court would proceed on the assumption that the decision is in the interest of the general public unless the contrary is shown." 10.&ems ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of tax or duty wholly or partially subject to conditions set out in the Notification. Such exemption Notification can be revoked, modified or superseded by a subsequent Notification in exercise of the same statutory powers in public interest even prior to the period of its operation specified therein. Such exemption Notification is not in the nature of any incentive and does not hold out any unequivocal representation or promise. Withdrawal of exemption in public interest is a matter of Government policy with which Court would not interfere in the absence of any manifest injustice, mala fide or fraud. The Court further held as under :- "….Since, the notification had been issued under Section 25(1) of the Act, the very same power ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e industries and industrial production in the country. Where the Government on the basis of the material available before it, bona fide, is satisfied that the "public interest" would be served by either granting exemption or by withdrawing, modifying or rescinding an exemption already granted, it should be allowed a free hand to do so.…." 12. Mr. Maninder Singh has also placed reliance on Shrijee Sales Corporation and Another v. Union of India - 1997 (89) E.L.T. 452 (S.C.) = (1997) 3 SCC 398. In this case the Court observed as under :- "(1) The determination of applicability of promissory estoppel against public authority/Government hinges upon balance of equity or "public interest". (2) It is the Court which has to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
