Tribunal interprets Notification 44/90 narrowly, overturns Commissioner's decision.

The Tribunal held that the waiver of duty under Notification 44/90 applied only to Rifampicin and formulations with INH, excluding other formulations of Rifampicin. As the goods in question did not fall under this specific category, the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in extending the coverage of the notification. The Tribunal emphasized the plain wording of the notification and rejected the broader interpretation by the Commissioner (Appeals) based on a previous notification. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order and allowed the appeal brought by the Appellant.

---

---

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Notification 44/90 regarding the duty on single ingredient formulations of Rifampicin.
2. Whether the waiver of duty under Notification 44/90 applies only to Rifampicin and formulations with INH.

Analysis:
1. The appeal dealt with the issue of whether single ingredient formulations of Rifampicin were liable to pay duty between February 1989 and March 1989 due to Rifampicin being shifted from the First Schedule to the Second Schedule. The Respondents argued that Notification 29/88 exempted all formulations based on the list of Bulk Drugs specified in the First Schedule from duty. However, the Asstt. Commissioner held that only formulations of Rifampicin with INH were covered by Notification 44/90, not all formulations of Rifampicin. The Commissioner (Appeals) disagreed, stating that Notification 44/90 applied to all formulations of Rifampicin.

2. The appellant's representative contended that Notification 44/90 specifically covered Rifampicin as a Bulk Drug and formulations with INH, excluding other formulations of Rifampicin. The Tribunal agreed, noting that the waiver of duty under the notification was limited to Rifampicin and formulations with INH. As the goods in question were not formulations of Rifampicin with INH, the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in extending the coverage of the notification. The Tribunal emphasized that the plain wording of the notification restricted the waiver to the specific formulation of Rifampicin with INH, rejecting the broader interpretation by the Commissioner (Appeals) based on the previous Notification 29/89. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order and allowed the appeal brought by the Appellant.

---