2010 (8) TMI 331

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....p;   Shri Anand Nainawati, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Avinash Thete, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : B.S.V. Murthy, Member (T)]. - The appellant is engaged in manufacture of P&P medicines and they had paid duty on their product Jensheng/Ginsec 400/500 at Nil rate of duty upto February 1994 and thereafter at 10%. The lower authority has held that the goods were levia....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the learned SDR submitted that since Ginsec powder is put in gelatine capsule, the medicament cannot be called ayurvedic medicine and therefore has to be classified under CETH 3003.10. Further, he also submits that the appellant had never filed classification list after 1991 and the Commissioner (Appeals) found that the classification list copy produced by the appellant was also not proper photo-....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ained therein and it has certainly a bearing on the determination of classification. Therefore, just because Ginsec powder is filled in capsule made of gelatine, the medicament cannot be said to have lost the quality of ayurvedic medicament. Further, the Tribunal had also taken a similar view in Procter & Gamble India Ltd. v. CCE, Noida, 2004 (174) E.L.T. 409 (Tri-Del.). Since these decisions have....