Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

9. Government notes that it is a settled issue that benefit under a conditional notification cannot be extended in case of non-fulfillment of conditions and/or non-compliance of procedure prescribed therein as held by the Apex Court in the case of Date of Order 24-09-2018 W.P.No.15127/2016 M/s Radiall India Pvt Ltd Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Government of India vs Indian Tobacco Association 2005(187) ELT 162 (SC); Union of India Vs Dharmendra Textile Processors 2008(231) ELT (SC). Also it is settle that a notification has to be treated as a part of the statute and it should be read along with the Act as held in case of CCE Vs Parle Exports (P) Ltd. 1998(38) ELT 741(SC) and Orient Weaving Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs UOI 1978(2) ELT 311(SC) (Confiscation Branch). Government also finds support from the observations of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s ITC Ltd. Vs. CCE reported as 2004 (171) ELT-433 (SC), and M/s Paper Products Vs CCE reported as 1999 (112) ELT - 765 (SC) that the simple and plain meaning of the wordings of statute are to be strictly adhered to. As such there is no force in the plea of the applicant that the lapse should be considered as a procedural one which is condonable in nature. As such, as the applicant did not follow the requirements of the Notification No.19/2004/CE(NT), the rebate claims are rightly held inadmissible.