2017 (11) TMI 1518

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion 4 (1) (a) of Central Excise Act, 1944 and in respect of the physician samples manufactured and cleared on job work basis, they have done the valuation on the basis of cost of manufacture plus 10% notional profit. The claim of the Revenue is that the value should have been arrived at on the basis of Rule 4 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 by taking the pro rata value of the trade pack of the same medicines. 2. Shri Vinod Awtami, Ld. CA appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the issue is no longer res integra as the identical case has been decided in the case of Medispray Laboratories Pvt.Ltd. & Others - 2017 (2) TMI 309-CESTAT Mumbai. According to said judgement, Rule 4 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000 shall a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d on principal to principal basis under Section 4 of the Central Excise Act on the transaction value. In the case of M/s Meditab Specialities Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Medispray Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., the physician samples were manufactured on job-work basis on behalf of the principal M/s Cipla Ltd. Excise duty was paid on the value i.e. 110% of the manufacturing cost. 2. The Departments contention is that in terms of Boards Circular No.619/10/2002-CX dated 19.2.2002, the valuation should be done under Rule 4 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000. Accordingly, the value of the similar medicaments sold in the market shall be taken as the value of the physician samples. Accordingly, a differential duty demand was confirmed and the sam....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gned order. He emphasized on the Boards Circular No.813/10/2005-CX dated 25.4.2005, wherein it was clarified that in case of free sample, the value should be determined under Rule 4 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000. Accordingly, the lower authorities have correctly held the determination of value of physician samples under Rule 4 of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000. He placed reliance on the following judgment: - (a) Sun Pharmaceuticals Inds. Ltd. - 2015 (326) ELT 3 (SC) (b) Johnson & Johnson Ltd. - 2016 (338) ELT A138 (SC) (c) Johnson & Johnson Ltd. - 2016 (338) ELT 425 (Tri-Mum) (d) Meghdoot Chemicals Ltd. - 2015 (320) ELT 643 (Tri-Mum) 5. We have correctly considered the submiss....