Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Biochem Pharmaceutical Industries Versus Commissioners of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax Daman

2015 (10) TMI 1351 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

Valuation of goods - Imposition of penalty - Held that:- Appellant is liable to pay duty on the physician samples under Rule 4 of the Valuation Rules. This fact was not disputed by the Learned Advocate on behalf of the appellant. Duty is payable unde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n of the Tribunal in the case of Indchemie Health Specialities (2008 (11) TMI 514 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD) would not be applicable herein. So, the demand of duty alongwith interest is justified. - demand of duty alongwith interest is upheld. The penalty .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.S. Patel, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri J. Nair, Authorised Representative ORDER Per: P.K. Das Heard both the sides and perused of the records. 2. The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of Medicaments in trade packs (for sale) and in ph .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Rules, 2000. A Show Cause Notice Dated 09.03.2006 was issued proposing demand of duty of ₹ 11,82,445.00 alongwith interest and to impose penalty for the period from April 2005 to June 2005 on the ground that the appellant is liable to pay duty .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tion order. 3. The Learned Advocate submits that the appellant paid duty following the Board Circular No. 643/34/2002-CX Dated 01.07.2002. It is further submitted that demand was confirmed on the basis of subsequent Circular No. 813/10/2005-CX Dated .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

uthorised Representative for the Revenue submits that the demand of duty is for the normal period of limitation and the law is settled by the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Indian Drugs Manufacturers Association vs Union of India 2008 (222) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rt and the Larger Bench of the Tribunal, the appellant is liable to pay duty on the physician samples under Rule 4 of the Valuation Rules. This fact was not disputed by the Learned Advocate on behalf of the appellant. His contention is that the Board .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. 33 (Tri.-Ahmd.). In that case, the demand of duty was for the period February 2003 to January 2004 and the Tribunal held that the Board Circular Dated 01.07.2002 is applicable. We find that the duty is payable under Rule 4 of the Valuation Rules as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version