2005 (4) TMI 81 - HC - Central Excise

Tribunal Ordered to Reconsider Duty on Physicians' Samples, Must Follow Supreme Court's Decision on Rectification Application.

RPG LIFE SCIENCES LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA

RPG LIFE SCIENCES LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA - 2005 (187) E.L.T. 433 (Guj.) , [2006] 144 STC 267 (Guj) Issues involved:Challenge to Tribunal's Final Order and Miscellaneous order regarding levy of duty on physicians' samples of medicines, rejection of rectification application by Tribunal, consideration of Apex Court's decision by Tribunal in rectification proceedings.Analysis:Issue 1: Challenge to Tribunal's Final OrderThe petitioner, a Limited Company engaged in the manufacture of medicines, challenged the Tribunal's Final Order confirming the demand of duty on physicians' samples of medicines. The Tribunal's decision was based on show cause notices issued by the Additional Collector. The petitioner contended that the Tribunal should have adjudicated the matter in their favor as the High Court had already ruled in their favor on the same issue. The petitioner sought rectification of the Tribunal's decision based on the subsequent confirmation of the High Court's decision by the Apex Court. The Tribunal rejected the rectification application, leading to the current challenge before the High Court.Issue 2: Rejection of Rectification Application by TribunalThe Tribunal rejected the petitioner's rectification application citing reasons such as the decision of a Larger Bench that a subsequent order is not a ground for reopening concluded proceedings, and the absence of the representative who participated in the rectification proceedings from the earlier proceedings. The High Court emphasized the legal position that the decision of the Apex Court or the jurisdictional High Court is binding and must be considered by the Tribunal. The High Court criticized the Tribunal for overlooking the settled legal position and failing to rectify the mistake in light of the Apex Court's decision, which was available at the time of the Tribunal's decision.Issue 3: Consideration of Apex Court's Decision by TribunalThe High Court reiterated the legal principle that a decision of the Apex Court or the jurisdictional High Court is binding and must be considered by the Tribunal. The High Court emphasized that the Tribunal should have taken into account the Apex Court's decision, which was brought to its attention during the rectification proceedings. The High Court criticized the Tribunal for disregarding the settled legal position and failing to rectify the mistake based on the Apex Court's decision, which was available before the Tribunal's decision but was pointed out by the petitioner at a later stage due to publication timing. The High Court held that the Tribunal's reasoning for rejecting the rectification application based on the absence of the representative from earlier proceedings was unfounded and emphasized that the Tribunal must consider all relevant issues raised before it, regardless of the representatives involved.In conclusion, the High Court quashed the Tribunal's order and directed the Tribunal to consider the rectification application, giving both parties a fair opportunity to present their case in light of the settled legal position regarding the consideration of decisions by the Apex Court and jurisdictional High Court. The parties were instructed to appear before the Tribunal for further proceedings, and the petition was allowed without costs.