2016 (6) TMI 1003

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....said Notification and Customs Duty Exemption Certificate was accordingly, issued after the State Government gave its recommendation. The machines were installed and the authorities issued a certificate of installation, evidencing the installation of the aforesaid machines. Meanwhile, due to financial constraints, there was change of management with new set of promoters. The new management could not trace various records contemplated under the Notification for the years 1989 to 1994. This prompted the petitioner to approach the authorities for the issuance of the installation certificate. The Joint Directorate of Health Services, who is the District Medical Officer, inspected the hospital and issued a installation certificate on 06.03.1997 in respect of all the 23 machines. 3. One of the conditions to be complied with by the Hospital to claim relief under Notification 64/88 relates to the providing of medical, surgical or diagnostic treatment not only without any distinction of caste, creed, race, religion or language, but also free on average to at least 40% of their outdoor patients and free to all indoor patients, belonging to families with an income of less than Rs. 500/- per....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bove Judgment. 10. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant strenuously contends that Apollo Hospital's case is not applicable on the case on hand, as the period specified under the order impugned in the writ petition is not covered by the Notification. He further contends that as per the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mediwell Hospital v. Union of India, reported in 1997 (89) ELT 425 (SC), every notification granting exemption must be construed to cast continuing obligation on the part of all those who have obtained the certificate from the appropriate authority and this has been last cite off.    11. No one appeared for the respondent. 12. In the order impugned in the writ petition, the appellant / respondent withdrew and cancelled all Customs Duty Exemption Certificate issued to the respondent / petitioner under Notification No.64/88-Cus, dated 01.03.1988 and also rejected the request for issuance of installation certificate. The orders impugned in the writ petition are dated 05.07.1999 and 06.08.1999. In the above said first order, dated 05.07.1999, date of issuance of Customs Duty Exemption Certificate for each item of equipment....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the notification dated December 29,1977, and as the Legislature had not conferred upon the State Government the power to issue notifications having retrospective effect, to so hold would be to render the said notification void. The High Court referred to a number of decisions on the question of the power to make subordinate legislation having retrospective effect. We find it unnecessary for the purpose of deciding this point to refer to any of the authorities cited by the High Court. Both the notifications dated December 29, 1977, are in express terms made with effect from January 1,1978. They do not at all purport to have any retrospective effect and, therefore, they could not affect the operation of the earlier notifications dated May 23,1977, until they came into force on January 1, 1978. Further, both Section 3 and Section 5(1) in express terms confer power upon the State Government to issue notifications "from time to time". Section 3 provides that "the State may, from time to time by notifications, declare..." goods liable to purchase tax. Prior to January 1, 1978, the provision to Sub-section (1) of Section 5 provided that "The State Government may, from time to time by noti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cribing a rate of tax, and that notification is later superseded by another notification further enhancing the rate of tax, all tax liability under the earlier notification is wiped out and no tax can be collected by the State Government in respect of any transactions effected during the period when the earlier notification was in force." 16. In State of Rajasthan v. Mangilal Pindwal, reported in MANU/SC/0549/1996, it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as follows : "As pointed out by this Court, the process of a substitution of statutory provision consists of two steps; first, the old rule is made to cease to exist and, next, the new rule is brought into existence in its place. (See: Koteewar Vittal Kamath v. K. Rangappa Baliga & Co.-). In other words, the substitution of a provision results in repeal of the earlier provision and its replacement by the new provision. As regards repeal of a statute the law is thus stated in Sutherland on Statutory Construction: "The effect of the repeal of a statue where neither a saving clause nor a general saving statute exists to prescribe the governing rule for the effect of the repeal, is to destroy the effectiv....