Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + SC Central Excise - 2015 (5) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (5) TMI 409 - SC - Central ExciseClassification of fixed dos combination of Vitamin B-1, B-6 and B-12 injectible as well as tablets form - Held that - goods in question would be classified under Heading 3003.10 - Decision of Larger Bench of tribunal in the case of Micropure Parenterals Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III 2005 (10) TMI 114 - CESTAT, MUMBAI referred - - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues involved:
Classification of fixed dos combination of Vitamin B-1, B-6 and B-12 injectible and tablets under Chapter Heading 2936.00 or Heading 3003.10. The Supreme Court heard two appeals regarding the classification of fixed dose combinations of Vitamin B-1, B-6, and B-12 injectible and tablets. The issue was that two different Tribunal Benches had given contradictory decisions on the classification of these goods. The Delhi Bench classified the goods under Chapter Heading 2936.00, supporting the Revenue's case, while the Mumbai Bench classified the same goods under Heading 3003.10, as claimed by the assessee. Due to this conflict, the matter was referred to a larger Bench, which resolved the issue in the case of Micropure Parenterals Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-III. The respondent held that the goods should be classified under Heading 3003.10, in line with the assessee's claim. Notably, the Revenue did not appeal the decision and accepted the classification under Heading 3003.10. Consequently, the appeals filed by the assessee were allowed, while the appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. In conclusion, the Supreme Court resolved the issue of classification of fixed dose combinations of Vitamin B-1, B-6, and B-12 injectible and tablets by upholding the classification under Heading 3003.10, as claimed by the assessee. The conflicting decisions of the two Tribunal Benches were reconciled through reference to a larger Bench decision, which was accepted by the Revenue. This judgment provides clarity on the classification of these goods, ensuring consistency in future cases.
|