1998 (11) TMI 210

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tted that the appellants, M/s. Universal Generics Pvt. Ltd. manufacture veterinary medicaments, viz. Thiabendazole Premix BP (Vet) under Pharmacopoeia name and classified the same under sub-heading 3003.20 of the Tariff. The Assistant Collector under two orders dated 16-2-1989 and 30-6-1989 classified the impugned product under sub-heading 3003.10 holding that British Pharmacopoeia (Veterinary) had not been specified as one of the Pharmacopoeia in Note 2 to Chapter 30 of the Central Excise Tariff Act; that Dy. Chief Chemist had clarified that Thiabendazole Premix did not figure in recognised Pharmacopoeia and the labels and packets of the impugned product were having the monogram of M/s. Dynamic Pharmacols (P) Ltd., Bombay under licence fro....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d Cosmetics Act. Reliance was placed on the decision in the case of CCE v. Lenec Institute of Pharma (P) Ltd. - 1996 (85) E.L.T. 60 (Tribunal). 3. Countering the arguments, Shri H.K. Jain, ld. SDR submitted that according to Note 2(ii) to Chapter 30, a Patent or Proprietary medicaments means any drug which bears a name on itself or on its container a name which is not specified in a Pharmacopoeia specified in the note; that British Pharmacopoeia (Veterinary) is not one of the Pharmacopoeia specified in the Note and accordingly the impugned product is a P or P medicament; that the "Notices" contained in British Pharmacopoeia (Veterinary) 1977 provided that "The term British Pharmacopoeia used without qualification means the British P....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....garded as a Proprietary name. He, however, showed that the product "Thiabendazole Premix" is mentioned in the British Pharmacopoeia also. It is mentioned therein that "A standard is given in the British Pharmacopoeia Addendum 1977 and the British Pharmacopoeia (Veterinary)". 4. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. The ld. Advocate, appearing on behalf of the Appellants, has shown that as the name of the medicine manufactured by them is mentioned in British Pharmacopoeia and as such it cannot be said that the impugned medicine is a Patent or Proprietary medicament on this count. There is no substance also in the submissions of the Revenue that the later part of the Note 2(ii) is applicable in the present case as inve....