High CourtsDivision Bench

Commissioner of Cus., Bangalore vs Central Manufacturing Technology Institute

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 5 July 2001 · Citation: (2002) 142 ELT 336

HON’BLE JUDGES
Chidananda Ullal, J · Ashok Bhan, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Petition No. 628 of 2000

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 80 words
1.

We agree with the view taken by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (for short CEGAT) that the Notification Annexure-D was clarificatory in nature. It amended the earlier Notifications and substituted the words "Spare Parts" with the words "Computer Software". Clarificatory Notifications are retrospective in nature and the CEGAT has rightly granted the benefit of the Notification Annexure-D to the respondent Assessee.

2.

Referable question of law does not arise from the order of the CEGAT. Dismissed.