2008 (4) TMI 636

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... gi, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - After dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of duty and penalty, we proceed to decide the appeal itself inasmuch as a short issue is involved. 2. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of P & P medicine. During the period November 1989 to January, 1999 a Dart of stock of the medicines crossed the expiry .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rmission of the proper authority under the Centra1 Excise law. We find that Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that though the appellant applied to the competent authority for permission for destruction, they were well aware that no such permission was granted by the competent authority and as such, they have to assess their duty liability on the said goods. The Deputy Commissioner vide his lette .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nsufficient for the revenue authorities for grant of permission to destroy admittedly, the expired medicines. In any case, we find that there is no dispute as regards the destruction, which was carried out in the presence of the Food and Drugs Authorities and under their directions, the appellant cannot be held liable for delay on the part of the revenue's action. 5. In view of the above, we .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X