2004 (2) TMI 71

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tage, it has to be paid at the "Tow" stage. Also the final conclusion of the Tribunal that the Notification No. 76/92 dated 1st July, 1992 has retrospective effect has been arrived at without giving any cogent reasons. This Notification makes no referance to Notification No. 191/85. It is an exemption granted for the first time on 1st July, 1992. Such an exemption can have no retrospective effect unless the Notification itself so specifies. - Decided in favour of Revenue.
S.N. Variava, H.K. Sema, JJ. [Order]. - This Appeal is against the judgment of the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (in short "CEGAT") dated 26th September, 1996. 2. Briefly stated the facts are as follows :- The Respondents manufacture Polyester F .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... anufactured out of the same is cleared on payment of duty and subject to the procedure laid down under Rule 56A. Likewise polyester staple fibre is exempted from duty in case the same is manufactured out of tow on which duty has been paid. Thus, the framers of the statute and the legislature have envisaged only one stage levy of duty i.e. either on tow or on staple fibre. Therefore, notification 191/85 has to be taken to have been issued in this context of levy of duty. Therefore, the exemption given has to be taken to be of the duty leviable either on the tow stage or at the staple fibre stage. Even if under Notification 191/85 exemption stipulated is in respect of duty payable on staple fibre what has to be read into this is that the exem .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... stage or at the Polyester Fibre stage. 4. The arguments of the Revenue, which have been produced in paragraph 3 of the impugned judgment, was exactly this. Yet for reasons, un-understandable to us, the Tribunal concludes that accepting the argument of the Revenue would defeat the purpose of the Notification No. 191/85. All that the Revenue is claiming is that duty has to be paid at one stage. Since duty has not been paid at Polyester Fibre stage, it has to be paid at the "Tow" stage. Also the final conclusion of the Tribunal that the Notification No. 76/92 dated 1st July, 1992 has retrospective effect has been arrived at without giving any cogent reasons. This Notification makes no referance to Notification No. 191/85. It is an exemption .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X