9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 1003X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd is administering a Hospital in the city of Trichy; that the petitioner decided to acquire certain sophisticated machines for the Hospital; that the petitioner wanted to avail benefit of Notification No.64/88, dated 01.03.1988 introduced by the Union of India, in exercise of the powers under Section 25 (1) of Customs Act, 1962 and the petitioner sought certificate for exemption of duty under the aforesaid Notification and Customs Duty Exemption Certificate was accordingly, issued after the State Government gave its recommendation. The machines were installed and the authorities issued a certificate of installation, evidencing the installation of the aforesaid machines. Meanwhile, due to financial constraints, there was change of managemen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ificate. 5. The Central Government also realised the problem in following the said notification and therefore, repealed the same, by Notification No.99/94, dated 01.03.1994. The petitioner was not required to observe the formalities after the said date. The petitioner had also taken necessary steps to conduct rural medical camps, to bring about the awareness of such facilities among the needy people. 6. On 24.11.1998, a field inquiry was conducted through C.S.U of Trichy Commissionerate of Customs and Central Excise and since the Hospital appears to have failed to fulfil the conditions of Customs Notification 64/88, action was initiated. 7. The respondents initiated steps and called upon the petitioner to pay the duty payable on the mach ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the part of all those who have obtained the certificate from the appropriate authority and this has been last cite off. 11. No one appeared for the respondent. 12. In the order impugned in the writ petition, the appellant / respondent withdrew and cancelled all Customs Duty Exemption Certificate issued to the respondent / petitioner under Notification No.64/88-Cus, dated 01.03.1988 and also rejected the request for issuance of installation certificate. The orders impugned in the writ petition are dated 05.07.1999 and 06.08.1999. In the above said first order, dated 05.07.1999, date of issuance of Customs Duty Exemption Certificate for each item of equipment is given in Annexure-A. It is seen that Customs Duty Exemption ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... priate to refer the Supreme Court Judgments : (1) State of Orissa v. Titaghur Paper Mills Co., Ltd., MANU/SC/0325/1985 (2) State of Rajasthan v. Mangilal Pindwal, MANU/SC/0549/1996 15. In State of Orissa v. Titaghur Paper Mills Co., Ltd., reported in MANU/SC/0325/1985, it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as follows : "Yet another contention raised by the contesting respondents with respect to the impugned provisions was that the two notifications dated December 29, 1977, having been made in "supersession" of all previous notifications issued on the subject, the effect was to wipe out all tax liability which had accrued under the notifications dated May 23,1977. The High Court held that to hold that the liability was so ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... State Government may, from time to time by notification, specify". Thus, the power of the State Government to issue notifications under these two sections is to be exercised by it "from time to time" and, therefore, the State Government can under Section 5(1) issue a notification and repeal and replace it by another notification enhancing or lowering the rate of tax and similarly it can issue a notification under Section 3 declaring particular goods or class of goods to be liable to tax on the turnover of purchases and subsequently by another notification repeal that notification with the result that the particular goods or class of goods will from the date of such repeal be again liable to pay tax on the turnover of sales. In the notificat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rther enhancing the rate of tax, all tax liability under the earlier notification is wiped out and no tax can be collected by the State Government in respect of any transactions effected during the period when the earlier notification was in force." 16. In State of Rajasthan v. Mangilal Pindwal, reported in MANU/SC/0549/1996, it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as follows : "As pointed out by this Court, the process of a substitution of statutory provision consists of two steps; first, the old rule is made to cease to exist and, next, the new rule is brought into existence in its place. (See: Koteewar Vittal Kamath v. K. Rangappa Baliga & Co.-). In other words, the substitution of a provision results in repeal of the earli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
