2004 (7) TMI 404 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Modification of pre-deposit order and waiver of pre-deposit.
2. Classification of the product "Franch Oil NH" under CETA Schedule.
3. Early disposal of the appeal due to high stakes.

Analysis:

1. The judgment dealt with the modification of a pre-deposit order where the appellants failed to comply with the initial directive to deposit Rs. 30.00 lakhs. The appellants sought a total waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery citing financial hardships and a stronger prima facie case on merits. The Bench directed the appellants to deposit Rs. 5.00 lakhs within 15 days, which they complied with. The appellants claimed a strong prima facie case based on literature supporting their product. The Respondent referred to a previous Apex Court decision, but the Bench found the appellants' case distinguishable. The Bench modified the pre-deposit order based on the submissions and records, considering it sufficient for Section 35F of the Central Excise Act.

2. The issue of classification arose regarding the product "Franch Oil NH" under the CETA Schedule. The appellants argued for classification under sub-heading 3003.20 based on the product label, which indicated it was an ayurvedic proprietary medicine for external use. Literature on record supported the medicinal uses of castor oil, the main component of the product, for therapeutic purposes. The appellants contended that the product was not cosmetic but meant for therapeutic and prophylactic purposes. The Bench distinguished a previous judgment on "massage oil" as having cosmetic use only, unlike the therapeutic claims made for "Franch Oil NH." After reviewing the literature and submissions, the Bench found a prima facie case in favor of the appellants but deemed the pre-deposit of Rs. 5.00 lakhs sufficient.

3. Another application sought early disposal of the appeal due to high stakes involved. Recognizing the importance of a timely resolution for both parties, the Bench scheduled the appeal for hearing on a specific date to expedite the process. This decision aimed to serve the interests of all parties involved due to the significant implications of the case.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the modification of the pre-deposit order, classification of the product under the CETA Schedule, and the need for early disposal of the appeal, providing detailed analysis and considerations for each issue raised during the proceedings.