Electronic gazette publication governs customs notification enforceability, and higher duty cannot apply to bills of entry filed earlier.

A fiscal notification required to be published in the electronic gazette becomes enforceable only on valid e-publication, not merely on the printed date, and a customs duty liability crystallises at the rate in force when the bill of entry is presented for home consumption. Once self-assessment is completed under the Customs Act, a subsequent reassessment cannot apply an enhanced rate unless the statute authorises such retrospective change. The Gujarat HC therefore treated the earlier presentation date as controlling, held the higher duty inapplicable, and found the reassessment unsustainable, with consequential refund relief following.

---

---

Issues: Whether Notification No. 29/2018-CUS dated 01.03.2018 became effective on the date of issue or only on the date of its e-publication and digital signature, and whether reassessment of the bills of entry on the basis of the higher rate of duty was lawful.

Analysis: Section 8 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 recognises publication through electronic gazette, and the governing principle is that a notification takes effect when it is duly published in the manner prescribed by law. In the context of customs duty, the applicable rate is the rate in force on the date and time when the bill of entry is presented for home consumption under Section 15 of the Customs Act, 1962. Once the duty is correctly self-assessed under Sections 46 and 47 of the Customs Act, 1962, subsequent reassessment cannot alter the rate unless the statutory framework permits such change. The Court relied on the settled position that subordinate legislation and notifications operate prospectively unless the statute clearly authorises retrospectivity, and treated the time of e-publication as determinative for enforceability.

Conclusion: The notification took effect only on its e-publication date, not on the date printed on it, and the enhanced duty could not be applied to bills of entry presented earlier. The reassessment was therefore unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The petitioners succeeded in challenging the reassessment and were held entitled to refund of the differential duty with consequential relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a fiscal notification is required to be published in electronic gazette, enforceability begins only upon valid e-publication, and the duty payable on import is governed by the rate in force at the time of presentation of the bill of entry; subsequent notification cannot retrospectively alter that crystallized liability absent statutory authorisation.

---