Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a corrigendum published in the gazette could operate as an amendment to the notification and, if so, whether the duty demand could be sustained for the period from 2-3-2001 to 31-3-2001 while the demand for 1-3-2001 alone had to be set aside.
Analysis: The notification issued for valuation on MRP basis was subsequently corrected by a corrigendum that was also published in the gazette. The corrigendum was treated as having the effect of an amendment to the notification and, therefore, as possessing statutory force. On that basis, the altered position applied from the date of amendment. Since the amendment took effect on 2-3-2001, the duty liability could be sustained only from that date onwards and not for 1-3-2001.
Conclusion: The corrigendum was validly operative as an amendment to the notification. The duty demand for 2-3-2001 to 31-3-2001 was upheld, while the demand for 1-3-2001 was set aside.