Customs notification effective from date of issue; provisional assessment records supported differential duty demand.

A customs notification enhancing duty was treated as effective from its date of issue, so clearance made after that date could not escape the higher rate. Documentary entries on the Bills of Entry, including the provisional bond number and provisional clearance stamp, were taken as proof that the imports had been provisionally assessed, making a demand for differential duty sustainable. On those facts, the appeal failed on merits, and the departmental cross-objection was held not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the customs notification enhancing duty took effect from the date of its issue; (ii) whether the imported goods were assessed provisionally so as to justify demand of differential duty.

Issue (i): whether the customs notification enhancing duty took effect from the date of its issue.

Analysis: The notification was issued on 1-9-1989 and the Tribunal accepted the settled position that a notification becomes effective from its date. The plea that it could not operate against the clearance made on 5-9-1989 was therefore untenable.

Conclusion: The issue was decided against the assessee and in favour of Revenue.

Issue (ii): whether the imported goods were assessed provisionally so as to justify demand of differential duty.

Analysis: The Bills of Entry showed the provisional bond number and a stamp of provisional clearance on the warehousing documents, which established that the assessments were provisional. On that basis, the demand for differential duty was sustainable.

Conclusion: The issue was decided against the assessee and in favour of Revenue.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed on merits and the departmental cross-objection was held not maintainable.

Ratio Decidendi: A customs notification takes effect from its date of issue, and documentary indications on Bills of Entry can establish provisional assessment, supporting a demand for differential duty.

---