2010 (3) TMI 534

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... CESTAT is legally right in giving relief to the Respondent under the amended Sec. 68 of the Customs Act, 1962, which came into operation only from 14-5-2003, when the transaction in question had taken place much earlier to the date of commencement of the said amended Section? (ii) Whether the CESTAT is legally right in granting relief to the Respondent under amended Sec. 68, when in the earlier round of litigation the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka has refused to give such a relief under Sec. 23(2) of the Customs Act, 1962? (iii) Whether the CESTAT is legally right in quashing the Duty, the interest and penalty, while giving relief to the Respondent under amended Sec. 68 of the Customs Act, 1962, when the proviso to the said Section....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the CESTAT, the Revenue has filed this appeal. 3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 4. Mr. Shashikantha, learned counsel for the Revenue, mainly contends that the Tribunal has committed a serious error in granting relief to the assessee by amending the provisions of Section 68 of the Customs Act since as the same has come into effect from 14-5-2005 onwards. When the assessee has failed to get the relief on an earlier occasion from the hands of this Court, the amended provisions of Section 68 of the Act could not have been invoked by the Tribunal. He lastly contends that even if these contentions are held against the Revenue, the order of the Tribunal is liable to be set aside as the Tribunal by invoking the provision....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....it petition on an earlier occasion considering the provisions of Section 23(2) of the Act cannot be held to be a bar by applying the principles of res-judicata to invoke the proviso to Section 68 of the Act. Therefore, question No. 2 has to be answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. In regard to question No. 1, we are of the opinion that, if the matter is pending on the date of the amendment is a prospective one, the prospective amendment would  enure to the benefit of the assessee. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the amended provision would enure to the benefit of the assessee as the intention of the legislature is to give benefit to the assessee to grant exemption in respect of the duty payabl....