1988 (2) TMI 181

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for the Respondent. [Order per : S.D. Jha, Vice-President (J)].  - The question for decision in this batch of appeals, arising out of the same impugned order, is benefit of exemption in respect of additional duty (CVD) in terms of notification 55/75-CE, dated 1-3-1975 as amended by Notification 62/78-CE, dated 1-3-1978 or successor Notification 234/82-CE, dated 1-11-1982 on the goods "....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....abhulal Shah & Others v. Union of India & Others 1987 (28) E.L.T. 193 (Bom.) and submitted that the Hon'ble High Court in Kumar Prabhulal Shah case had held "Sorbitol" solution to be intermediate drugs eligible to benefit of exemption under Notification 55/75-CE, dated 1-3-1975. He drew particular attention to para 7 of the decision which recites that an earlier decision in Rakesh Enterprises c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of Maharashtra State though they were not actual manufacturers. 4. Shri Sundar Rajan, JDR submitted that the Bombay High Court decisions had been challenged before the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court as also in Supreme Court. He also urged that the appellants -did not held L-4 licence for manufacture of drugs. They were only traders. He reiterated the contentions as found in the order ....