9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 914X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in case of Essar Steel India Ltd. vs. CCE & ST, Surat – I [2016 (4) TMI 232 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD], wherein this Tribunal has held that Sometimes, the explanation may be inserted to clarify a doubtful point of law, which would be effectively retrospectively. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Excise Appeal No. 50878 of 2018 (SM) - Final Order No. 51821/2018 - Dated:- 14-5-2018 - Hon ble Shri C.L. Mahar, Member (Technical) Shri P. Juneja, Authorized Representative (DR) for the appellant Shri Himanshu Bansal, Advocate for the respondent ORDER Per. C.L. Mahar This is an appeal filed by the Department against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) dated 31/10/2017. 2. The issue in brief is that the party ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eld that :- 22. An explanation inserted in a Section/Rule, is generally to explain the meaning of the words contained in the Section/Rules. The purpose of explanation is to explain the meaning and intendenments of the Section/Rule. Sometimes, the explanation may be inserted to clarify a doubtful point of law, which would be effectively retrospectively. In the present case, the expressions in the explanation as inserted by Notification No. 2/2016-C.E. (supra), make it clear that it is for explaining the meaning of clause sales promotion in the context of Rule 2(l) of the Rules, 2004. It is to provide an additional support to the dominant object of the word sales promotion in Rule 2(l) in order to make it meaningful and purposeful. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on should be considered as declaratory in nature and effective retrospectively. The relevant paragraph in the said decision is extracted herein below :- 20. But, the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Cadila Healthcare Ltd. (supra) was unable to concur with the contrary view taken by the Hon ble Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Ludhiana v. Ambika Overseas (supra). The Hon ble Gujarat High Court held that this issue is concerned, the question is answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. In this background, legislature explained the meaning of the sales promotion by inserting Explanation in Rule 2(l) of Rules, 2004 and declared that sales promotion includes services by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
