2005 (4) TMI 455

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1994. The demand was raised by the Department in a show-cause notice which invoked the larger period of limitation, alleging that the assessee had suppressed the correct composition of the product before the Department. There is also a penalty of Rs. 30 lakhs on them. The present application seeks waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery in respect of the duty and penalty amounts. 2.Ld. Counsel for the appellants claims a strong prima facie case on merits on the strength of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Amrutanjan Ltd. - 1995 (77) E.L.T. 500 (S.C.). It is submitted that the ingredients of the subject product, which were alleged to be synthetic chemicals extraneous to Ayurvedic system, did have Ayurvedic equivalents an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the Apex Court in Amrutanjan case and, therefore, the assessee has a strong prima facie case in claiming that the subject product is an Ayurvedic medicament falling under Sub-Heading No. 3003.30 of the CETA Schedule and attracting the benefit of exemption under Notifications 32/89-C.E., dated 1-3-1989 and 9/93-C.E., dated 1-3-1993, covering the period of dispute in the case.  3.Ld. SDR, on the other hand, submits that none of the above four ingredients was shown to have been used in accordance with the procedure laid down in Ayurvedic texts and, therefore, the subject product could not have been treated as 'Ayurvedic medicament'. Ld. SDR, in this connection, relies on the Supreme Court's Judgement in the case of Naturalle Health ....