2026 (8) TMI 1305

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s. Shilpi Satyapriya Satyam, Adv., Ms. Bhuvneshwari Pathak, AOR, Mr. Naman Kamboj, Adv., Ms. Bhavya Aggarwal, Adv., For the Respondent(s): Mr. Raghavendra P Shankar, A.S.G., Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR, Mr. Karan Lahiri, Adv., Mrs. Pallavi Mishra, Adv., Mrs. Nasandiya Singh, Adv. ORDER 1. The issues involved in this appeal relates to classification of the product steel tubular transmiss....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....00 vide Circular No. 545/41/2000-CX at Annexure-A5. As such, the levy for the month of July and August, 2000 would amount to retrospective application, which is impermissible, and this fact has not been considered by the authorities as well as by the Appellate Tribunal, namely, CESTAT. Hence, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant has prayed for same being set aside and levy being quashed....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....icate that it is issued subsequent to the circular dated 06.09.2000, and even in the said circular, what has been stated is reiteration of the law laid down by this Court, namely, the goods in question is classifiable under the sub-heading 7306.90 and not under 7308.90. As such, the question of the levy being retrospectively being applied does not arise. 6. Even otherwise also, it can be notice....