1985 (7) TMI 351

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion No. 123/74-C.E., dated 1-8-1974 -It fixed a lower rate of duty of 55% ad valorem for tyres for Motor Vehicles.     (2) Notification No. 178/77-C.E., dated 18-6-1977 It gave reduction in duty (commonly called 'set off') to the extent of the duty already paid under Item 68 of the Tariff on the inputs.   (3) Notification No. 142/78-C.E., dated 14-7-1978 It exempted tyres and tubes, excluding flaps, "from so much of the duty of excise leviable thereon (read with any relevant notification issued under the said sub-rule (I) of rule 8 and in force for the time being), as is in excess of     (a) 87 ½ %, of such duty, if produced in any factory which commenced production....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....T) on how to work out the effective duty.] (iii) It was the settled law that if two interpretations were equally possible, the one favourable to the assessee should be adopted. The appellants also faintly mentioned the plea of violation of principles of natural justice by the Assistant Collector but then stated that they would not it. 4. The Department's representative rested his case on the wording of the operative part of Notification No. 142/78-C.E., as re-produced at item (3) of ò paragraph 1 above, and added that the definition of "effective duty" inserted in the sub-clause 4(4)(d)(ii) of Section 4 was "for the purposes of this sub-clause" only as expressly stated at the beginning of the Explanation, i.e., for the ....