TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 1055X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are seeking rectification of mistake in Order of this Tribunal No. A/55/WZB/AHD/2009, dated 7-1-09. 2. Shri P.D. Rachchh, learned Consultant on behalf of the appellant submits that they had challenged the clarification issued by CBEC vide Circular No. 733/49/2003-CX., dated 6-8-03. Further, he also submits that the decisions of the Tribunal cited by him were not considered and the Tribunal has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... omputing the aggregate value of clearances under this notification, clearances of any specified goods, which are exempted from the whole of the duty of Excise leviable thereon by any other notification issued under sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the aforesaid Rules and for the time being in force, shall not taken into account. The Tribunal had observed that the conclusions they quoted in his order u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. The case of the appellant is somewhat similar to this case. In this case, Notification No. 8/03 was amended w.e.f. 1-4-03 which required the clearances of previous year to be calculated for the purpose of determining the eligibility in the manner as brought out by the amendment. The department has applied this amendment in respect of clearances from 1-4-03 only. Therefore, it is quite clear tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the present case are as under : Appellants have referred to the amending Notification No. 141/79 dated 30-3-79, which provides that in computing the aggregate value under Notification No. 71/78, the clearances of specified goods, which are exempted from the whole of duty of excise leviable thereon by any other notification issued under sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bsequent to 1-4-03, the date on which the amendment has been made is being considered. Therefore, this decision does not help the appellant. It also makes it clear that a subsequent amendment is not clarificatory in nature. Another decision cited by the learned Consultant is also on the same lines. Since we are convinced that the appellant s claim is not correct, there is no need to go into the cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
