2001 (9) TMI 860

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lcutta-I in which it is alleged that they abused the provisions of exemption Notification No. 48/77-C.E., dated 1-4-1977, as amended with the intent to evade Central Excise duty during the period from 16-1-87 to 28-2-90 inasmuch as they removed from their factory clinical samples of medicaments without fulfilment of the condition for availing exemption as stipulated in proviso (iii) of the said Notification viz., "That the samples are packed in a form distinctly different from regular trade packing and each smallest packing is clearly and conspicuously marked 'physicians samples not to be sold' ". Therefore, they were called upon to show cause why the central excise duty amounting to Rs. 11,29,764.00 leviable on such samples during the peri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ON - 60 ml. and ALFUMET SUSPENSION - 60 ml. AND 4.       LECLYTE SACHET - 10 gms. 5.       RANIAL STRIPS - 2 TABS + 4 TABS 6.       ALFAM STRIPS - 2 TABS + 4 TABs. 4. The learned Representative submits that he is not contesting the case in respect of the products listed at Serial Nos. 1, 2 and 3 above since the clinical samples of these products cleared by them from their factory were not packed in a form distinctly different from regular trade packing. He very fairly submitted that the Tribunal in the case of Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Hyderabad v. C.C.E., Hyderabad [1987 (31) E.L.T. 829 (T)] has held that merely packing ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arned SDR for the Revenue reiterated the findings arrived at by the Commissioner. 6. We have carefully considered the submissions made before us. As already stated that the appellants are not contesting their case on merits in respect of the products, viz. CYPL - 180 ml., Anaflam Suspension - 50 ml. and Alfumet Suspension - 50 ml. However demand in respect of the other products is contested on merits and whole of the case is contested on time bar. It is argued that C/Lists in respect of these products filed by them right from 1987 claiming the exemption under Notification which were duly approved by the concerned Central Excise Authorities. All these C/Lists were accompanied by the outer covers/packings subscribed with the inscripti....