TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 914X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tate or the Union Territory but that of the Central Government or Parliament, as the case may be. This Court is of the opinion that the impugned order of the Revisional Authority as well as the order of the appellate authority which it confirms, cannot be sustained - petition allowed. - W.P.(C) No.3903/2018 - - - Dated:- 29-10-2018 - MR. S. RAVINDRA BHAT AND MR. PRATEEK JALAN JJ. Petitioner Through: Dr. Seema Jain, Mr. Ajay K. Jain, Mr. Dushyant K. Mahant and Ms. Shova Choudhary, Advs. Respondent Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms. Suhani Mathur, Advs. S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.(ORAL) 1. Claiming to be aggrieved by the Revisional Authority s order under Section 35EE of the Central Excise Act, the present writ petitioner has approached this Court for quashing of the impugned order as well as the order in appeal by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals). 2. The facts of this case are that the petitioner manufactured Gutkha and forwarded two consignments for export purposes. It claimed the benefit of excise rebate in terms of Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 (hereafter Rules ). That provision enables the Central Government ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of Pankaj Jain Agencies vs. Union of India, 1994 (72) E.L.T.805 (S.C.) the Hon'ble Supreme Court have held that the Rules and Notifications take effect from the date of their publication In the official gazette. In another case Haryana Plywood Industries vs. Collector of Customs 199 (51) E.L.T. 119 (Tribunal); it was concluded by the Hon'ble Tribunal that the date of effect of a notification is the date on which it is made available public. 4. The petitioner approached the Revisional Authority i.e. the Central Government who endorsed the view of the Commissioner holding as follows: 3. On examination of the revision application in the light of Commissioner (Appeals)'s order, it is noticed by the Government that there is no dispute that the gutkha was cleared by the applicant from their factory on 11.9.12 only under two ARE-1s to the merchant exporter when the prohibition order with regard to sale, manufacture, storage, transportation, display or distribution of gutkha was already in force. Applicant has claimed that they had cleared gutkha from the factory prior to publication of the above Notification by the Delhi Government, but they have not adduced a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e ground of limitation which was occasioned on account of delay in depositing the requisite registration/Court fee. 6. Dr. Seema Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner urges that the conditions of the notification of 11.09.2012 are entirely extraneous to the issue of grant or refusal of rebate which are wholly governed by Rule 18 of the 2002 Rules as well as the relevant procedure spelt out in Rules 2 and 3 of the Notification No.19/2004 by virtue of its extension to pan masala (by a notification No.32/2008 dated 28.08.2008). It is submitted that the expression export is nowhere defined in the Central Excise Act and has to be understood either in the common parlance or in terms of the definition in the cognate enactment i.e. the Customs Act, 1962 which defines it as an Act of taking to a place outside India . It was submitted that the ban with respect to storage, transportation, sale, etc. of gutkha within the territory of Delhi or for the purpose of use, sale and consumption in Delhi and did not per se apply to export transactions that aimed at export. 7. Mr. Harpreet Singh, learned counsel for the Revenue contended that the order of the Revisional Authority is valid. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich tobacco and/or nicotine are used as ingredients, as they are injurious to health. AND WHEREAS, Guthka (by whatever name) and Paan masala containing tobacco and/or nicotine is an article of food in which tobacco and/or nicotine are widely used as ingredients now-a-days. AND WHEREAS, it is expedient to prohibit the manufacture, the storage, the sale, the transportation, the display or the distribution of Gutkha and Paan masala containing tobacco and/or nicotine in the NCT of Delhi, being food products in which tobacco and/or nicotine are widely used as ingredients. NOW, THEREFORE, in pursuance of regulation 2.3.4. of the Food Safety and Standards (Prohibition and Restriction on Sales) Regulations, 2011, the manufacture, the storage, the sale, the transportation, the display or the distribution of Guthka by whatever name and Paan masala containing tobacco and/or nicotine as ingredients by whatsoever name it is available in the market, is hereby prohibited in the NCT of Delhi in the interest of Public Health. (K.J.R. BURMAN) COMMISSIONER FOOD SAFETY, DELHI. No.F1(3)/DO-I/2012/5185-5203 Dated: the 11 September, 2012 11. A careful ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
