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>Supreme Court upholds ayurvedic status, orders duty re-calculation. Tribunal revisits limitation period, penalties waived.</h1> <h3>M/s. Ishaan Research Lab (P) Ltd. Versus CCE - Delhi -II</h3> M/s. Ishaan Research Lab (P) Ltd. Versus CCE - Delhi -II - TMI Issues:1. Classification of products as ayurvedic medicines or cosmetics.2. Valuation of products for duty calculation.3. Application of extended limitation period.4. Imposition of penalty on the appellant.Classification of products as ayurvedic medicines or cosmetics:The case involved a manufacturer of ayurvedic drugs facing allegations of duty evasion by misclassifying cosmetic products as ayurvedic medicines. The investigation revealed that certain products were cosmetics, not ayurvedic medicines. The Tribunal initially classified 22 products as ayurvedic medicines and the rest as cosmetics, attracting different duty rates. The Supreme Court later confirmed 20 products as ayurvedic medicines and directed re-determination of value for duty calculation.Valuation of products for duty calculation:The Apex Court provided directions for re-determination of value and re-quantification of duty based on sales to related parties and independent buyers. The Commissioner re-quantified the duty demand for specific periods, dropping some demands. However, the appellant contested that the re-quantification was not done in line with the Apex Court's order, leading to a remand for further adjudication.Application of extended limitation period:The Tribunal earlier held that the extended limitation period was not applicable, making certain Show Cause Notices time-barred. The matter was adjudicated de-novo for re-quantification of duty demands, resulting in the confirmation of duty for specific periods.Imposition of penalty on the appellant:The Tribunal set aside penalties imposed on related parties but left the question of penalty on the appellant open. The appellant challenged the duty re-quantification, arguing that necessary information had been provided, leading to a remand for re-quantification in line with the Apex Court's directions.---
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
