2003 (7) TMI 332

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Respondent. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. -  Kopran Ltd., the assessee, was, at the relevant time, engaged in the manufacture of pharmaceutical products - ampicillin trihydrate, amoxycillin trihydrate and cloxacillin sodium. The maximum retail price fixed for these three products was specified in the Drugs (Price Control) Order, 1987. The assessee therefore declare the value for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aving come to know from an unreported decision of the Tribunal reported in the Excise Law Times that what was actually paid was the value. He says however, that the position has been settled by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Aluminium Industries v. CCE - 1998 (99) E.L.T. 486. In that judgment, the Supreme Court has held that in the case of goods for which retail price or maximum retail price .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ating to aluminium and not the amount that was actually paid which was higher than this price. Applying this ratio, it will have to be held that the price fixed by the Drug (Price Control) Order will be assessable value. That being the case, there has been no evasion of duty, and consequently the assessee and its employees are not liable to penalty. The question of any refund will not arise, in th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X