Order Date – 03 February 2023

Parties: Adani Wilmar Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs Bangalore

Facts –

• The Appellant, Adani Wilmar Ltd, had claimed benefit of the Exemption Notification No. 50/2017-Cus dated 30.06.2017 at Serial No. 65 that imposed duty at the @ 40% on goods imported on 05.03.2018.
• The imported goods were not allowed for clearance on the ground that duty @54% was applicable in terms of the exemption notification which was amended vide Notification No. 29/2018 dated 01.03.2018.
• The Deputy Commissioner (Imports) held that Notification Number 29/2018 Cus dated 01.03.2018 2 that increased the basic customs duty from 40% to 54% in respect of RBD Palm Olien Edible Grade3 classifiable under CTH 1511 9090 through three Bills of Entry, each dated 01.03.2018, came into effect from the date of its issue on 01.03.2018 and not on 06.03.2018, on which date the appellant claimed that it was digitally signed and uploaded for publication in the Official Gazette.

Issue –

• Whether the exemption notification will be effective from 01.03.2018 or from 06.03.2018?

Order –

• The Tribunal held that Subsection (4) of section 25 provides that every notification issued under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2A) shall, unless otherwise provided, come into force on the date of its issue by the Central Government for publication in the Official Gazette and the guidelines 28, 29, 40, 41 of the Guide for Organization further provide that a notification cannot be published unless it is digitally signed by the nodal officer. 
• It was held that the duty would be payable on the imported goods at the rates specified in the exemption notification dated 01.03.2018, even though the entry inwards was granted to the vessel on 05.03.2018 and the said exemption notification dated 01.03.2018 was published in the Official Gazette only on 06.03.2018, after it was digitally signed. The exemption notification came into effect only on 06.03.2018, on which date it was published in the Official Gazette after it was digitally signed for e-publication. 
• The appeal is allowed. The amount of differential duty deposited by the appellant shall be refunded to the appellant with the applicable rate of interest