Rescinded exemption notification cannot extend to post-withdrawal clearances; duty follows the rate on the date of clearance.

The concessional duty under Notification No. 36/76 did not apply to excess production cleared after the notification was rescinded on 16-8-1978. The governing principle was that duty is determined by the rate prevailing on the date of clearance, and the concession was linked to that operative date rather than to the mere fact of excess production. In the absence of any saving clause preserving the benefit after withdrawal, the rescinded notification could not be invoked for post-rescission clearances. The claim for concessional duty therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 36/76 dated 25-2-1976 continued to apply to excess production cleared after the notification was rescinded on 16-8-1978.

Analysis: The concession was linked to the rate of duty applicable at the time of clearance, not merely to the fact of excess production. Once the notification was rescinded, and in the absence of any saving clause preserving the concession, the benefit could not be extended to clearances made after the rescission date. The governing principle applied was that the rate of duty prevails on the date of clearance of the goods.

Conclusion: The concessional rate of duty did not survive beyond 16-8-1978, and the claim for post-rescission clearances failed.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was rejected because the rescinded notification could not be invoked to obtain concessional duty on goods cleared after its cessation.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of a saving clause, a rescinded exemption or concessional notification cannot be applied to clearances made after its withdrawal, since duty is determined by the rate prevailing on the date of clearance.

---