ASIA TOBACCO COMPANY LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in these three writ petitions is one and the same. It is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. THE petitioner manufactures cigarettes in its factory at Hosur, Dharmapuri District. THE petitioner claims that it manufactures cigarettes for itself and for M/s. ITC Limited. Cigarettes are subject to levy of excise duty under Tariff item 4(II)(2) of the Central Excise Tariff under manufactured tobacco. THEre was a partial exemption notification No. 30/79 of Central Excise, dated March 1, 1979, hereinafter referred to as the exemption notification and the said notification, with its amendments by notifications Nos. 140/79 C.E. dated March 30, 1979 and 25/81 C.E. dated March 1, 1981, issued under sub-r. (1) of r. 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, hereinafter referred to as the "Rules", reads as follows :

(2.) THE petitioner claims, and there is no denial of the same by the respondents, that it was clearing cigarettes manufactured for itself and for M/s. ITC Limited at the rates specified in the Exemption Notification, depending on the assessable value. THE Central Government, by Notification No. 284/82-CE dated November 30, 1982, hereinafter referred to as the "Withdrawal Notification" rescinded the exemption Notification pursuant to the powers under sub-r. (1) of r. 8 of the Rules. THE Withdrawal Notification reads as follows :

(3.) THUS, we find that the respondents do not accept the stand of the petitioner that merely because the Official Gazette containing the Withdrawal Notification was placed on sale for the public on December 8, 1982, it would come into effect only on and from that date. Hence, the moot question that arises for consideration in these writ petitions is as to when the Withdrawal Notification must be deemed to have become effective and enforceable. Rule 8(1) of the Rules empowers the Central Government from time to time, by notifications in the Official Gazette, to exempt, subject to such conditions as may be specified in the notification , any excisable goods from the whole or any part of duty leviable on such goods. There cannot be any dispute that any notification withdrawing the exemption must also go through the same process of getting notified in the official Gazette. Can the bare printing of the Official Gazette containing the Withdrawal Notification and without the Official Gazette being made available to the public would amount to an effective notification ? As early as 1918, in Johnson v. Sargant & Sons [1918] 1 KB 101, it was recognised that an order made by the Food Controller under the Defence of the Realm Regulations, though dated May 16, 1917, but was not known to the parties to the action or to the public generally till May 17, 1917, would come into operation only when it became known, namely, on May 17, 1917. Bailhache J., who tried the action, observed as follows (p.103) :