2019 (11) TMI 554

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., Mumbai-I. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of P & P medicaments falling under Chapter 30 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They manufacture the medicaments on job work basis (loan licensee basis) and also on their own account and sell it to their respective customers. In the case of their own manufactured products, even the physician samples are sold to their customers who in turn distributed free of cost. The appellants are determining the value of the medicaments sold to their customers by adopting the transaction value under Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 when the goods were sold, but when it was manufactured on job work basis (loan licensee) valued....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....b work basis (loan licensee) to the principal manufacturer is covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Biochem Pharmaceuticals Ind. Ltd. vs. CCE, Vapi - 2015 (322) ELT 808 (SC). He has further submitted that this Tribunal in the case of Medispray Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCE, Goa - 2017 (5) GSTL 300 (Tri.-Mumbai), taking note of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, held that Rule 4 of the Valuation Rules, 2000 will not apply to the aforesaid situations. 4. Learned AR for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the learned Commissioner (Appeals). 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. 6. The short issue for consideration in the present appeals is whether the physician samples manufactured by t....