TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal quashes detention order, grants stay petition, directs clearance of goods</h1> <h3>SWISS PHARMA PVT. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., AHMEDABAD</h3> The Tribunal allowed the stay petition and quashed the detention order issued by the Assistant Commissioner under Section 11 of the Central Excise Act, ... - Issues:1. Duty demand confirmation on physician samples manufactured on job work basis.2. Imposition of penalty equal to duty and interest demand.3. Detention order under Section 11 of Central Excise Act, 1944.4. Applicability of valuation rules based on the period of dispute.5. Granting of stay petition and quashing of detention order.Analysis:1. The judgment addressed the duty demand confirmation of Rs. 22,64,563 against the appellant concerning physician samples manufactured on a job work basis. The duty was to be assessed as per Rule 4 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000. Additionally, a penalty equal to duty and interest was imposed. A detention order was issued under Section 11 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 by the Assistant Commissioner to recover the penalty and interest, despite a stay application pending before the Tribunal.2. The learned Advocate argued that the appellants had a strong case due to the applicability of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Ujagar Prints, which stated that physician samples should be assessed to duty based on the cost of production. As duty and interest had already been paid, the Advocate requested the grant of stay and the quashing of the detention order to avoid difficulties for the appellants.3. The Tribunal considered the submissions and acknowledged that the amounts deposited by the appellants for duty and interest were sufficient under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Consequently, the stay petition was unconditionally allowed during the appeal's pendency. The Tribunal also quashed the detention order issued by the Assistant Commissioner. The order was directed to be issued immediately to ensure the clearance of held-up goods due to the detention order, with instructions for the appellant to serve a copy to the Assistant Commissioner for the withdrawal of the detention order.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
