9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (8) TMI 50X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Revenue Authorities in both the States on the basis that the herbal extracts were leviable to excise duty under Chapter 13. As far as West Bengal was concerned the relevant entries were construed by the Commissioner and it was held that the goods were properly classifiable under Chapter 30 under Tariff Item 30.03. The rate of duty at that point of time was nil. He accordingly dropped the proceedings. 3.As far as Uttar Pradesh was concerned however, the Commissioner decided the proceedings against the appellant holding that the extracts were properly classifiable under Chapter 13. The appellant's further appeal to the Tribunal from this decision was rejected and that is the order impugned before us. 4.The relevant entries in Chapter 13 ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able for such uses put up in measured doses or in packings for retail sale or for use in hospitals. In relation to products of Heading No. 30.03, conversion of powder into tablets or capsules, labelling or relabelling of containers intended for consumers and repacking from bulk packs to retail packs or the adoption of any other treatment to render the product marketable to the consumer, shall amount to 'manufacture'." 8.The appellants raised several contentions including that of limitation. But, the mainstay of the appellants argument is a circular which has been issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) under Section 37B of the Act by which the Board has issued a clarification in respect of liquid vegetable extracts obtain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ". 11.The Tribunal which referred to the circular misinterpreted it when it said : "The ingredients - vegetables extracts could not be confused with the final medicaments prepared from such extracts along with other ingredients. Merely because the herbs had medicinal properties, it could not be said that the extracts were medicaments as per the definition in the tariff and as commonly understood." 12.The Tribunal's reasoning appears to be contrary to the CBEC circular and in any event wholly contradictory. According to the Tribunal the Circular in effect meant that : "The mixed or compounded vegetable extracts which had no therapeutic or prophylactic value were not 'goods' but if they had therapeutic or prophylactic value, they were ' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
