TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 56X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (3) TMI 202 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI] holding that Hajmola candy does not fall in the entries of drugs and medicines and it is taxable as a confectionery. In the present case as well the assessee had satisfactorily demonstrated that the product in question was an Ayurvedic Medicine, for which the assessee possessed a trade licence. The question of law framed by this Court is answered in the affirmative, i.e. in favour of the Petitioner Assessee and against the Department, by holding that Hajmola Candy is exigible to tax as Ayurvedic Medicine in terms of the List-A of the OST Act - revision disposed off. - STREV Nos.46, 47, 48 & 49 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 30-11-2021 - (DR. S. MURALIDHAR) CHIEF JUSTICE (A. K. MOHAPATRA) JUDGE Petitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 02/- for the period 1993-94. Likewise, the demand for the period 1994-95 was ₹ 7,03,361/-, for 1997-98 ₹ 7,31,717/- and for 1998-99 ₹ 13,14,901/-. 4. Being aggrieved by the above order of re-assessments, appeals were filed by the Petitioner, which were disposed of on various dates by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax (ACST) holding that Hajmola candy is an Ayurvedic medicine and needs be taxed at the prevailing rate of tax under Entry-37 of the list of goods. 5. Against the order of the ACST, further appeals were filed by the Assessee before the Orissa Sales Tax Tribunal (Tribunal) in Second Appeals. Cross-objections were filed by the Department. The sole question of law framed by the Tribunal for considerati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llants or under sub-heading 1704.90 of the Central Excise Tariff Act as per the revenue? The question was answered by the CEGAT, after referring to the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Panama Chemical Works v. Union of India 1992 (62) ELT 241 (M.P.) as under: On a careful consideration of the submissions made by both sides with reference to the facts and case law, we find that this issue has been covered by the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Panama Chemical Works as it was rightly pointed out by the appellants counsel. Since the ingredients of Swad and Hajmola are one and the same, we are not inclined to take different view on this issue. It is not even the case of the Department that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ur (2005) 4 SCC 9, the dispute involved classification of 2 items manufactured by the Appellants, namely (1) Lal Tail ; and (2) Janam Ghunti . The assessee s case was that Lal Tail had all the ingredients mentioned in Ayurvedic Text Books and had therapeutic properties. However, the Department contended that it could not be considered as a drug. The Supreme Court noticed that, apart from showing that the popular meaning attached to it by use of the product supported the case of the appellants, they had shown that, they have a Drug Controller s Licence for the product and they have also produced evidence by way of prescriptions of Ayurvedic doctors, who have prescribed these for treatment of rickets. 11.2 The Department, on th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
