2001 (1) TMI 356

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Respondent. [Order per : P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. - In this appeal the issue relates to the applicability of the provisions of section 2(a) of the Central Duties of Excise (Retrospective Exemption) Act, 1986. 2. The respondents were engaged in the manufacture of the goods which under the erstwhile Tariff were covered by T.I. 68 and they were paying the duty in terms of Notification N....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the provisions of Central Duties of Excise (Retrospective Exemption) Act, 1986 and observed that the respondents were liable to pay the duty only at the rate of 12 per cent which was prevailing till 28-2-1986 for T.I. 68 goods. 3. The Revenue has come up in appeal before us against the impugned order of the Collector (Appeals). 4. The main ground taken up by the Revenue is that s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the limit of Rs. 40 lakhs, but still the benefit of the provisions of the Act, 1986 which provided exemption with retrospective effect from the date of payment of duty could not be legally denied to them. Section 2 of that Act clearly enacts as under :- "Every notification issued by the Government on or after third day of March, 1986 but before 8th of August, 1986 in exercise of power conferre....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd from the 1st of March, 1986." 8. The respondents, as observed above, were paying the duty at the rate of 12 per cent at the relevant time when the Notification No. 213/86 came into force. The classification of their products, no doubt, stood changed under new Tariff w.e.f. 1-3-1986 to heading 8548 of the CETA, though earlier it was under TI 68 of the erstwhile Tariff. But still they wer....