2001 (7) TMI 765

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppellant. Shri Jayaram, for the Respondent. [Order per : Jeet Ram Kait, Member (J)]. - These Revenue appeals arise from the impugned Orders-in-Appeal Nos. 39, 40, 41 & 97/97 (CBE) dated 10-2-1997. One of the appeals arising from the same impugned order filed by the same appellant came up for final disposal on 28-6-2001 on which date none appeared for the respondents. 2. Today one ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d the Bench observed against the SDR's submission in paras 3 & 4 as follows : "3. Ld. DR submits that the Budget of 1996 has brought a change in the Section Note with a clarification that this process is to be treated as a process of manufacture and it should be considered as a clarificatory in nature having retrospective effect and hence the order requires to be set aside and the demands ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....considered as clarificatory and is required to be held as a new piece of legislation and intended to be operative from the date of passing of the leaislation. Therefore, the contention raised that changes brought in the Budget and the assessee's process of manufacture have retrospective effect is required to be rejected. In that view of the matter, respectfully following the citation already noted....