2025 (1) TMI 670

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and sold on principal to principal basis to other pharmaceutical manufacturers/brand owners of such products. 2. The facts in brief are M/s. Srushti Pharmaceuticals Pvt., Ltd, the Appellant is manufacturing 'physicians samples' under 'principal to principal' basis for other 'pharmaceutical manufacturers/brand owners of the medicaments, who have in terms of the principal to principal contract entered with the Appellant, require the Appellant to manufacture and sell to them, 'physician samples' for use by them for marketing their medicament products. Since the transaction value was as per the contract between the 'principal to principal', Appellant had discharged the Central Excise duty liability by ado....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 4. When the Appeal came up for hearing, the Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submits that issue is no more res integra and the transaction value adopted by the Appellant merits acceptance in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of CCE, Surat Vs. M/s Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd -2015 (326) E.L.T 3 SC). The Ld. Counsel also relied on the following decisions; 1. CCE, Thane Vs. Meghdoot Chemicals Ltd. 2022 (380) ELT 531 (SC) 2. Jayanti Food Processing (P) Ltd Vs. CCE. Rajasthan. 2007 (215) ELT 327 (SC) 3. Emil Pharmaceutical Industries (P) Ltd Vs. CCE, Thane, 2016 (334) ELT 143 (Tri-Bom) 4. Omni Protech Drugs Pvt Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune-1, 2011(274) ELT 377 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nder the Standard of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 to declare the 'Retail price' on the packages, if it is meant as 'physician samples' and no 'MRP' to be marked, since it is prohibited from being sold. Thus, the issue of valuation of 'physician samples' would have to be determined under Section 4 of the Act, ibid and that the Board's Circular No. 813/10/2005-CX dated 25.04.2005 also recognized that 'free samples' are also to be valued under Rule 4 of Central Excise Valuation (Determination of price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000. The Ld. Counsel further submits that applying the Board Circular requiring that value of 'physician samples' should be determined under Rule 4 of the Central E....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Wallace Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Belgaum vide Final Order No. 20136-20138/2024 dated 14.03.2024 (CESTAT, Bangalore). 4. M/s. Wintac, Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore-III Commissionerate vide Final Order No. 20458/2024 dated 15.04.2024 (CESTAT, Bangalore). 5. Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C.Ex., & Cus., Daman 2011 (263) E.L.T. 641 (SC). 6. Commissioner of C.Ex., Bangalore-I Vs. Bal Pharma Ltd.-2010 (259) E.L.T 10 (SC). 7. Commissioner of C.Ex., Calicut Vs. Trinity Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. 2005 (188) E.L.T 48 (Tri.-Bang.) 8. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vs. Commr. of C.Ex., Ahmedabad-II 2008 (232) E.L.T 245 (Tri.-LB) 9....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. The Commissioner Of Central Excise 2011 (1) TMI.13- Supreme Court 6. Commissioner Of C. Ex. Bangalore I Versus Bal Pharma Ltd. 2010 (9) TMI 307 Supreme Court 7. Wallace Laboratories P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Of Central Excise. Belgaum-2024 (3) TMI 689-Cestat Bangalore 8. M/s. Amazon Drugs Pvt. Ltd. Vs.Commissioner Of Central Excise (Appeals-II), Bangalore. 2023 (7) TMI 580-Cestat Bangalore 9. M/s. Medispray Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. M/S Meditab Specialities Pvt. Ltd.. And M/S Okasa Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Of Central Excise. Goa-2017 (2) TMI 309-Cestat Mumbai 10. M/s. Zyg Pharma Pvt. Limited. K.N. Mungi, Manager. Accounts & Auth. Signatory Vs. Cce. Indore (Vice-Versa)-2016 (12....