TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (1) TMI 588
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....'NOT FOR SALE' and retail price was not printed, the valuation of the goods shall be governed by Section 4 and not Section 4A. He placed reliance on the following decisions:- * Zydus Healthcare Ltd.- 2022 (7) TMI 351-CESTAT AHMEDABAD * Zydus Healthcare Ltd.- 2019 (10) TMI 810- CESTAT AHMEDABAD * USV LTD.Parvez K Kumana, Dilip A Pandit, Jayesh K Vasavda- 2019 (5) TMI 507- CESTAT AHMEDABAD * Biochem Pharmaceutical Industries- 2017-TIOL-2477-CESTAT-AHM * J B Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vide Order-in-Original No. DMN-IV/AC/ADJ/01/19-20 dated 18.12.2019 03. On the other hand, Shri G. Kirupanandan, learned Superintendent (AR) appearing on behalf of the revenue reiterates the finding of the impugned order. He placed reliance on the Hon'ble Apex Court judgment in the case of M/s. JAYANTI FOOD PROCESSING (P) LTD.- 2007 (215) E.L.T. 327 (S.C.). 04. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides and perused the records. We find that the fact is not under dispute that the medicaments have been supplied by the appellant to institutions such as BHEL, Railways and other government hospitals and on the package of the goods it is stated as 'NOT FOR SALE' and no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 07.01.2005 which reads as under: "Medicaments - Assessments on basis of retail sale price (MRP)In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) and sub-section (2) of section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (1 of 1944), the Central Government hereby specifies the goods mentioned in column (3) of the Table below and falling under Chapter or Heading No. or Sub-heading No. of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986) mentioned in the corresponding entry in column (2) of the said Table, as the goods to which the provisions of the said sub section (2) shall apply, and allows as abatement the percentage of retail sale price mentioned in the corresponding entry in column (4) of the said Table:- TABLES. No. Chapter or Heading No. or Sub-heading No. Description Abatement as a percentage of retail sale price(1)(2)(3)(4)1.3003. 10Patent or proprietary medicaments, other than those medicaments which are exclusively Ayurvedic, Unani, Siddha, Homoeopathic or Biochemic35%2.3003. 20Medicaments (other than patent or proprietary) other than those which are exclusively used in Ayurvedic, Unani, Siddha, Homoeopathic or Biochemic systems35% This notificatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e shall not be more than the pro-rata retail price of the main pack rounded off to the nearest paisa. "A perusal of the aforesaid provisions shows that the requirement of printing the MRP is in respect of products "offered for retail sale". Therefore, if the product is not offered for retail sale, the said provision of Rule 14 & 15 will not apply. In the present facts and circumstances, we need to examine whether if the provisions of Rule 14 or 15 could be attracted.4.11t is seen that investigations were extended to various customers/ dealers and in para 9 of the impugned order the list of customers has been enumerated. The gist of the investigation is reproduced in para 10,11,12 and 13 of the impugned order. The investigations confirmed that no evidence of printing of MRP on institutional supplies made through dealers was found. In fact whatever evidence was produced showed that the products contained the marking "hospital supply-not for sale only.4.2The impugned order has picked up the words "formulation intend for sale" appearing in para14 and para15 of the Drugs (Price Control) Order 1995 and come to the conclusion that it was mandatory in the facts and circumstances of the cas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., the retail price or maximum retail price thereof. "The argument in the impugned order being that the goods intended for ultimate sale to institutional buyers, are first sold to dealer/ distributors. Thus, when they are sold to dealers/ distributors the provision of DPCO 1995 get attracted. It is seen that the DPCO 1995 mandates, printing of retail sale price" on containers" as well as on minimum pack thereof offered for retail sale". From above it is apparent that what is covered in DPCO is only the items which are sold in retail. If a container is sold in retail, the container must contain retail sale price and if the content of such container are also sold in retail then each such pack sold in retail must have the MRP printed on it. From above it is apparent that the provisions are attracted only on goods offered for retail sale". In the impugned order, it is seen that the words offered for retail sale" appearing in DPCO 1995 have been overlooked. The said order only relies on the word sale" and upholds the applicability of the DPCO 1995 to all sales. We find that the sale appearing in para 14 and 15 of DPCO 1995 is only to be read in respect of the goods offered for retail sal....