Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2014 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (1) TMI 117 - CESTAT NEW DELHIClandestine removal of goods – Benefit of SSI Exemption Notification No.8/2001withdrawn – Held that:- There is no indication at the time of reintroduction of the disputed goods to the benefit of exemption notification so as to reflect upon the fact that such exemption was with retrospective effect - Budget speech clearly states that SSI exemption is being withdrawn in respect of arms and ammunition is clear indication of the fact that such exemption was withdrawn with clear understanding and is a conscious ac - judiciary cannot act as legislature and enact the provisions of law so as to fill any gap, which have been consciously left by the legislature. Grant of SSI exemption to various goods is the policy matter of the Government of India and cannot be interpreted by the judiciary on the ground that such benefit should have been extended to the manufacturers of arms and ammunition with effect from 1-4-2001 -the notifications issued have to be held as having prospective effect and cannot be claimed retrospective unless such notifications are clarificatory in nature or have been specifically pronounced to be with retrospective effect – Relying upon Shri Bakul Oil Industries v. State of Gujarat [1986 (11) TMI 45 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] – Decided against Assessee.
|