Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2006 (2) TMI 558

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... liquid (1 ltr) Coffecu Plus (Tablets), Zist powder (1 Kg) Stodi Powder (10 Kgs.), Naturally liquid (5 ltrs.), Livol PFS Concentrate-liquid (1 ltr) and Zigbir powder. These preparations had been assessed and cleared as normal food supplements under Chapter sub-heading 2302.00 of the First Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. However, the department on a routine audit check recommended for reclassification of the items under Chapter sub-heading 3003.39 CET as Ayurvedic herbal medicaments. As a result, demands have been revised. The Commissioner in the impugned order has not accepted the assessee's contention that the issue is completely covered by Larger Bench judgment rendered by the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Tetragon Chemie [200....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....T. 17 (S.C.)] has not been followed. No discussions or evidence on this aspect has been led in while passing the impugned order. (5)     The manner of use suggested in the product label and also the dosage prescribed is relevant for all animals/birds and not for curing or preventing any specific disease or ailment diagnosed in any particular bird or for treatment of such affected bird has been ignored and further the items are not registered as drugs has also been omitted for classifying the same as medicaments, in terms of principles laid down, inter alia, in the case of CCE v. Tetragon Chemie (P) Ltd. [2001 (135) E.L.T. 1435 (T)]. (6)     The clear and categorical aspects considered in the earlie....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ts : (1)     CCE Nagpur v. Vicco Laboratories [2005 (179) E.L.T. 17 (S.C.)] (2)     CCE Bangalore v. Tetragon Chemie (P) Ltd. [2001 (135) E.L.T. 1435 (Tri-Bang.)] (3)     CCE Vadodara v. Alembic Chemicals Works Co. Ltd. [1997 (94) E.L.T. 383 (T)] (4)     Montage Chemicals Ltd v. CCE, Mumbai [2003 (156) E.L.T. 209] (5)     Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. CCE, Surat [2004 (170) E.L.T. 421] (6)     ESPI Industries & Chemicals (Pvt.) Ltd. v. CCE, Hyderabad [1996 (82) E.L.T. 444 (S.C.)] (7)     Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. CCE, Nagpur [2003 (151) E.L.T. 387] (8)     C.E., Jaipur v. ....