Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

"However, even assuming that there could have been some doubt as to the intention of the legislation in this regard the matter is placed beyond all doubt by the Revenue's own consistent interpretation of the item over the years."

63. Thereafter, at page 1034, the court held :

"The Revenue is not being precluded from putting forward the present contention on grounds of estoppel. The practice of the Department in assessing the poles to duty (except in cases where they were exempt as the conditions in the exemption notifications were fulfillled) and the issue of notifications from time to time (the first of which was almost contemporaneous with the insertion of item 26AA) are being relied upon on the doctrine of contemporaneous expositio to remove any possible ambiguity in the understanding of the language of the relevant statutory instrument : See K. P. Varghese v. ITO , State of Tamil Nadu. v. Mahi Traders , Collector of Central Excise v. Andhra Sugar Ltd. [1989] (Supp) 1 SCC 144 and Collector of Central Excise v. Parle Exports P. Ltd. . Applying the principle of these decisions, that a contemporaneous exposition by the administrative authorities is a very useful and relevant guide to the interpretation of the expressions used in a statutory instrument, we think the assessed's contention that this products fall within the purview of item 26AA should be upheld."