Prospective fiscal notice cannot defeat accrued DEPB entitlement for exports completed under the earlier policy.

A fiscal public notice made operative from 1-4-1999 could not be treated as a retrospective clarification to deny DEPB credit for exports completed before that date. The text applies the settled rule that retrospectivity in fiscal matters must be clearly expressed, and where the scheme is ambiguous or reasonably capable of more than one interpretation, the construction favouring the assessee prevails. Because the export had already taken place under the earlier policy, the benefit under that regime remained accrued and could not be withdrawn by the later notice. The operative effect is that completed transactions are governed by the policy in force at the time of export, not by a later prospective amendment.

---

---

Issues: Whether Public Notice No. 1 dated 31-3-1999, which came into force from 1-4-1999, was merely clarificatory so as to deny DEPB credit for exports made before that date, and whether the petitioner was entitled to DEPB credit under the earlier policy.

Analysis: The dispute turned on the proper construction of the DEPB scheme and the effect of a later public notice on exports already completed. In fiscal matters, retrospectivity is exceptional and must be clearly expressed; where the language is ambiguous or reasonably capable of more than one interpretation, the interpretation favourable to the assessee prevails. The express statement that Public Notice No. 1 would operate only from 1-4-1999 showed that it was not intended to govern transactions completed before that date. The export in question had already taken place prior to 1-4-1999, and the earlier notification governed the petitioner's entitlement. The later notice could not be used to withdraw a benefit already available under the prior regime.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to DEPB credit, and the impugned order denying that benefit could not be sustained.

Final Conclusion: The later public notice operated prospectively and could not defeat the petitioner's accrued entitlement under the earlier DEPB scheme, so the writ petition succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: A fiscal notification that is expressly made operative from a future date cannot be treated as a retrospective clarification to deny a benefit for completed transactions, and ambiguity in the scheme must be resolved in favour of the assessee.

---