JUDGMENT

S. Ravindra Bhat, J. (Oral)--Claiming to be aggrieved by the Revisional Authority's order under Section 35EE of the Central Excise Act, the present writ petitioner has approached this Court for quashing of the impugned order as well as the order in appeal by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals).

2. The facts of this case are that the petitioner manufactured Gutkha and forwarded two consignments for export purposes. It claimed the benefit of excise rebate in terms of Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 (hereafter "Rules"). That provision enables the Central Government to grant rebate payable on excisable goods or duty paid on materials used in the manufacturing of processing of such goods on conditions or limitations as are prescribed. It is not in dispute that this procedure is spelt out in paras 2 and 3 of the Notification no.19/2004. The benefit of this rebate was extended to Gutkha vide notification No.32/2008; the petitioner's rebate claim was based upon its contention that the rebate was permissible by virtue of Notification No.32/2008, which specifically listed pan masala falling under tariff item 21069020 on pan masala containing tobacco commonly known as "gutkha" falling under tariff item 2403 99 90-on which duty of excise has been paid under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act.

3. The rebate claim was processed by the competent authority i.e. the Assistant Commissioner who granted it by the order-in-original dated 01.05.2013. The Commissioner of Central Excise, took cognizance of this order at the behest of the Revenue and reversed the rebate granted, on the premise that by a notification of 11.09.2012 issued by the Commissioner, Food Safety, Government of NCT of Delhi, the manufacture, storage, sale, transportation, display or distribution of Gutkha within the territory of Delhi was entirely prohibited. The essential reasoning on the basis of which the appellate authority disallowed the rebate is contained in the following extract of its order:

"7.1 I have also gone through the Notification no. F.1(3)/DO-I/2012/5185-5203 dated 11.09.2012 issued by the Commissioner of Food Safety, Govt, of NCT vide which manufacture, storage, sale, transportation, display or the-distribution of Gutkha (by whatsoever `name it is available in the market) and Pan Masala containing Tobacco/nicotine is prohibited in the NCT of Delhi-in the interest of public health w.e.f. 11.09.2012. The said notification was issued, in pursuance of regulation 2.3.4 of Food safety and standards (Prohibition and restriction on sales) Regulations. 2011 made by the Food safety and standards Authority 7of India in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1) of Section 92 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2000 (Central Act 34 of 2006) read with Section 26 thereof, that prohibits articles of food containing tobacco/nicotine with health hazards.

7.2 I have also gone through the case laws cited by the appellant and find that in the case of Pankaj Jain Agencies vs. Union of India, 1994(72) E.L.T.805 (S.C.) the Hon'ble Supreme Court have held that the Rules and Notifications take effect from the date of their publication In the official gazette. In another case Haryana Plywood Industries vs. Collector of Customs, 1994(51) E.L.T. 119 (Tribunal); it was concluded by the Hon'ble Tribunal that the date of effect of a notification is the date on which it is made available public."

4. The petitioner approached the Revisional Authority i.e. the Central Government who endorsed the view of the Commissioner holding as follows:

"3. On examination of the revision application in the light of Commissioner (Appeals)'s order, it is noticed by the Government that there is no dispute that the gutkha was cleared by the applicant from their factory on 11.9.12 only under two ARE-1s to the merchant exporter when the prohibition order with regard to sale, manufacture, storage, transportation, display or distribution of gutkha was already in force. Appl