Arijit Pasayat, J. - (1.) Leave granted in SLP (C) Nos. 16719 of 2006 and 16947 of 2006.
(2.) In all these appeals common questions are involved and are directed against the judgment and final order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (in short the Rs. Tribunal). Since in appeals filed by the appellants common question of law is involved, there is no need to elaborately deal with the factual aspects. Question is the effect of a circular issued by Central Board of Excise and Custom (in short the Rs. Board) i.e. Circular No. 42 of 1997 dated 19.9.1997. The CESTAT held that the Notification No. 2/95-CE dated 4.1.1995 as amended by Notifications Nos. 21/97-CE dated 11.4.1997, 100/95-CE dated 2.6.1995 and 7/96-CE dated 1.7.1996 shall have overriding effect over the Circular. It held that there is no manner of doubt that the appellants claim of liability to pay 50% of the aggregated customs duty on the goods cleared to the Domestic Tariff Area (in short the Rs. DTA) is not legally tenable. It was held that the Circular was in direct conflict with the Notification No. 2/95.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the appellant in each case submitted that the Circular was issued on the basis of representations made by various assessees and therefore the Notification cannot stand on the way of relief being granted.;