1998 (8) TMI 176

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ]. The appellants are aggrieved by the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai confirming the order of the Assistant Collector who has approved classification lists filed by the assessees for products such as Ampicillin for oral suspension BP , Chloramphenicol for oral suspension BP , etc. under CET sub-heading 3003.20 attracting nil rate of duty, denying modvat facility .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... le, since this triangle does not indicate any relationship between the appellants and the goods in question. The appellants submission that there is no difference in the labels of the products covered by the present impugned order and those considered by the Collector (Appeals) in his order dated 25-6-1991 wherein he has held that the goods were branded goods and hence they were P or P medicines .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X