I.T.C. LIMITED v. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, BOMBAY
vidhipandit.com/case/sc-s-1996-5-214-215
Decision dates shown here are day-precision where the judgment's own text states a date the extractor is confident in, and year only otherwise -- never a fabricated day. See the editorial policy for how dates are extracted.
Headnote — Supreme Court Reports (editorial summary, not part of the judgment)
Reporter's headnote (continued) and case details
A
AUGUST 26, 1996
B
Notification-Operativeness and enforceability-Publication in Official Gazette-Changes brought about by Notification also announced through radio-Press release also mad~-Appellant's claim that there was failure to C make the law knowit-Held not maintainable.
Mis. Pankaj Jain Agencies v. Union of India and Ors., [1994) 5 SCC 198, relied on.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 10379 of D 1996. From the Judgment and Order dated 8.4.96 of the Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, Wctst Regional Bench, Bombay in P.O. No. 1260196-WRB in Appeal No. E.D. (Bom)-298of1986.
E Joseph Vellopally, Ravincler Narain, Ashok Sagar, Ms. Punita Singh and Ms. Sonu Bhatnagar for JBD & Co. for the Appellants.
Judgment
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
The points raised in this appeal are covered squarely against the F appellant by the decision of this Court in Mis. Pankaj Jain Agencies v. Union of India and Others, [1994] 5 SCC 198, wherein it was emphatically stated as under :
'We, therefore, se(~ no substance in the contention that not- withstanding the publication in the Official Gazette there was yet G a failure to make the law known and that, therefore, the notification did not acquire the eiements of operativeness and enforceability. This contention of Shri Ganesh is unacceptable."
(Para 18)
H We may also observe that rejection by the Tribunal of the appellant's 214
I.T.C. LID .. v. COLLECTOROFCEN1RALEXCISE 215
case. even on the admitted position that on the very date of issue of A notification there was a radio announcement about the changes brought about by these notifications; and also a press release is another ground to justify rejection of the appellant's claim. Accordingly, there is no ground to admit the appeal.
The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. B
T.N.A. Appeal dismissed.
Report an error in this judgment →
Contains information from the Indian High Court / Supreme Court Judgments dataset, licensed under CC-BY-4.0