1981 (12) TMI 39

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd 1979 as Annexures 1 and 2 to the writ petition. At Item 3 dyed tissue paper was shown to be nil. Similar is the position in 1979. The petitioner has averred that the same situation prevailed in the intervening and other years. On the 8th of August, 1980, the petitioner received a notice purporting to be under Rule 10(a) of the Rules. The notice directed the petitioner to show cause as to why he should not be required to pay excise duty on coloured tissue paper for the period from August, 1976 to June, 1980. The petitioner in response to the notice, sent a detailed reply on the 16th August, 1980. It transpires that a letter concerning the same matter was sent to the petitioner by the Department on the 1st of September, 1980, and the petit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Rules. The amending Act which brought section 11A on the statute book did not contain any provision to the effect that proceedings pending under Rule 10 on the date whom the aforesaid provision came into effect would be treated as proceedings under the section. The question arises as to whether proceedings pursuant to the notice dated 8th of August, 1980, issued under Rule 10 can be continued after the omission of these rules with effect from the 17th of November, 1980, and also as to whether the notice of the 8th August, 1980 lapsed with the omission of the Rule. We were, at one stage of the view that the proceedings could contintie, but in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Rayala Corporation (P) Ltd. v. The D....