9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (10) TMI 254X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ir duty liability correctly on Sorbitol cleared by them to M/s. Sarabhai M. Chamicals, Baroda. They have, therefore, become liable to be penalised under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944". The Commissioner then ordered that demand of duty amounting to Rs. 81,32,904/- is confirmed. A penalty of Rs. 8 lakhs was also imposed on the appellants. Being aggrieved by this order, the appellants have filed the captioned appeal. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that the appellants manufactured Sorbitol. The Govt. of India issued Notification No. 31/88-C.E., dated 1-3-1988 prescribing effective rate of duty of 5% ad valorem for other bulk drugs falling under Chapters 28, 29 or 30 of the Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of material fact, as the same did not specifically mention whether Vitamin-C manufactured by their purchaser fell in the category of bulk drug or formulation. The end-use certificate only declared that the Sorbitol was used as such or as ingredient in the manufacture of Vitamin 'C' which was not at all specific to indicate whether the said product qualified the condition prescribed in the notification. The certificate never showed nature or category of the Vitamin-C manufactured by their purchaser i.e. M/s. Sarabhai M. Chemicals, whether it was a bulk drug or formulation. This was absolutely necessary as the product was simultaneously a bulk drug and a formulation. 3. Arguing the case Shri S. Swaminathan, ld. Consultant submits that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... end-use certificate. He submitted that in view of the above decisions of this Tribunal taking consistantly the same view the benefit of Notification No. 31/88 was available to the appellants and prayed that the appellant's appeal may be allowed. 4. Shri Ravinder Babu, ld. DR submits that Sorbitol is neither used as such as a formulation nor is it used as an ingredient in other formulation. Reading copiously from the decision of the Commissioner he submitted that since Sorbitol was not used as a formulation as such nor was it an ingredient of a formulation, therefore, the benefit of Notification No. 31/88 was not admissible. He reiterated the findings of the authorities below. 5. We have heard the rival submissions. We note that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
