CC Vs. BALUMAL SONS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In all these Revenue appeals common question of law and facts were involved. Hence, they are taken up together for disposal as per law.

(2.) The Respondent/importer filed three Bills of Entry on 31.5.1990 for clearance of Zip in coils No. 5 Raw. That day, the benefit of Notification No. 50/84 was available, but it was denied on the ground that this Notification was rescinded by Notification No. 190/90 dt. 31.5.1990. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the assessees' claim solely on the ground that Notification No. 190/90 dt. 31.5.1990 had been made known to the Public only after it was published in the Gazette. The Revenue state that the date of Notification is operational date of the Notification and not the date of publication in the Gazette. In this regard Ld. DR Shri A. Jayachandran relies on the recent Apex Court judgement rendered in the case of Union of India v. Ganesh Das Bhojraj reported in 2000 (116) ELT 431 (SC) : 2000 (89) ECR 228 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has now clarified and held that the date of notification should be taken as the date for operation of the notification and not the date on which it was published and made known to the public.

(3.) Appearing on behalf of the Respondents Ld. Counsel Ms. Prameela submits that they have also filed cross objection and contends that the Apex Court judgment is not applicable to Customs cases and is applicable only to the Excise case.