M/s. Andhra Sugars Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai

November 26, 2021

Civil Appeal No. 5029 of 2005

A. Excise — CBEC Notifications — Noti. No. 21/2002 — When applicable — At the relevant time notification required that the unit be modernised to avail benefits — However, assessee only undertaken “capacity expansion” — Held, assessee not entitled to benefits of the notification

B. Excise — CBEC Notifications — Amendment, if retrospective — Held, amendment to circular is only prospective unless it is clarificatory in nature

Print 🖨 PDF 📄

(A.K. Sikri and Rohinton Fali Nariman, JJ.)

M/s. Andhra Sugars Ltd. ________________ Appellant

Commissioner of Customs, Chennai _______ Respondent

Civil Appeal No. 5029 of 2005, decided on May 15, 2015

The Order of the court was delivered by

Order

We find that the authorities below have arrived at the finding of fact that the appellant-assessee had only undertaken “capacity expansion” of the existing unit and “not modernisation” and therefore, it could not get the benefit of Notification No. 21/2002 which, at the relevant time, require that the unit be modernised, if the benefit of said Notification is to be taken. We also agree with the opinion of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal that subsequent amendment in the said Notification whereby capacity expansion was also included, would be prospective only as it was not clarificatory in nature. We, thus, find no merit in this appeal which is, accordingly, dismissed.

———

You may also like