The Regional Director vs M/S.Habib Exports
4.The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that so far as the
present case is concerned, the proceedings under Sec.45A was concluded
on 02.02.2007, about 30 months prior to the coming into force of the
second proviso to Sec.45A. In other words, some 2 ½ years prior to the
insertion of the provision. Arguing further, the learned counsel submitted
that the amendment will have only prospective operation and cannot have
any retroactive operation to reopen a concluded proceedings. Reliance
was placed on Hindustan Times Ltd., Vs Union of India and others
[(1998) 2 SCC 242], ESI CORPN. Vs C.C.Santhakumar[(2007) 1 SCC
584], Regional Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation Vs
Shalimar Hotel and Another [MANU/MH/2683/2013], The District
Livestock Farm Vs The Regional Director [W.P(MD)No.173 of 2013],
dated 11.02.2019 before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court,
and Thrirumurugan Matriculation School Vs The Deputy Director
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4/19
CMA.No.711 of 2022
[CMA.No.72 of 2022], dated 12.04.2022 before the Madras High Court,
Civil Appeal Nos.3191 to 3194 of 2011 before the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India.