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 the revised classification under Chapter 39 and the differential duty demand were to operate only from the date of the trade notice, and whether the appellants were entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 217/86 in working out the duty liability.
Analysis: The Tribunal followed its earlier decision on identical facts and applied the principle that the revised classification order issued by the Board takes effect from the date on which it is made public through the trade notice, not from an earlier date. On that basis, the higher rate of duty could be levied only from the date of the trade notice. The Tribunal also accepted that, once the goods were treated under Chapter 39 for duty purposes, the benefit linked to captive consumption and the exemption notification had to be taken into account while computing the demand.
Conclusion: The revised classification and enhanced duty were held applicable only from the date of the trade notice, and the benefit of Notification No. 217/86 was required to be considered while determining the duty payable, resulting in partial relief to the assessee.