<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2002 (10) TMI 278 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101850</link>
    <description>Notification No. 245/83 granted partial exemption to patent or proprietary medicaments only where the exemption was claimed for medicines cleared with a retail price stated in the relevant price list. The price list contemplated was the one required under Paragraph 19 of the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 1979. Where the medicines were manufactured by a loan licensee on behalf of the principal manufacturer, the duty to file that price list rested on the principal manufacturer, not the loan licensee. Accordingly, omission by the respondent from its own price list did not constitute breach of the third proviso, and the exemption remained available.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 13:09:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138899" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (10) TMI 278 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101850</link>
      <description>Notification No. 245/83 granted partial exemption to patent or proprietary medicaments only where the exemption was claimed for medicines cleared with a retail price stated in the relevant price list. The price list contemplated was the one required under Paragraph 19 of the Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 1979. Where the medicines were manufactured by a loan licensee on behalf of the principal manufacturer, the duty to file that price list rested on the principal manufacturer, not the loan licensee. Accordingly, omission by the respondent from its own price list did not constitute breach of the third proviso, and the exemption remained available.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101850</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>