9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (1) TMI 357X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed the concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 31/99, dated 1-3-1988 and have not produced the end-use certificate for the period 1-3-1991 to 31-3-1991. The appellant s contention before the authorities was that the notification in question does not stipulate for production of end-use certificate as the inputs were purchased from domestic industry. They further contended that as the issue was also covered by large number of judgments of Tribunal and that of the Bombay High Court, therefore, they cited the case of Harish Brothers v. CCE of the Tribunal as reported in 1989 (40) E.L.T. 122 and that of the Bombay High Court judgment as reported in [1991 (56) E.L.T. 39 (Bom.) = 1991 (37) ECR 23 (Bom.)]. However, the Commissioner did no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... milar. 10. In view of the foregoing, the impugned order is correct in law, and the appeal is rejected as devoid of merits. 3. Ld. Advocate submits that these very arguments were agitated before the Tribunal in subsequent cases. However, as there was no stipulation in the Notification for production of end-use certificate, the Revenue's view was negative. He cites Camphor Allied Products v. CCE [1998 (104) E.L.T. 526] which follows earlier judgments of the Tribunal. He submits that as the issue is totally covered and there is no other point required for determination, therefore the appeal is required to be allowed in terms of the ratio. He further submits that Commissioner (Appeals) was not justified in making the observations in para ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tification 31/88 is reproduced below : Effective rates of duty on certain goods, including bulk drugs - In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, the Central Government hereby exempts goods of the description specified in column (2) of the Table hereto annexed and falling under Chapter 28, 29 or 30, as the case may be, of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986), from so much of the duty of excise leviable thereon under the said Schedule, as is in excess of the amount calculated at the rate specified in the corresponding entry in column (3) of the said Table. THE TABLE Sl. No. Description of goods Rate of duty (1) (2) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d there is no charge that the products are not bulk drugs, and also for the reason that the classification lists during the relevant period have been approved under Chapter 29. Learned SDR is also unable to substantiate his contention that the products in dispute may not be covered by the definition of bulk drugs under Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 1987. In view of the above, following the ratio of the Tribunal's decision in the case of Maize Products cited supra we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal. 6. As regards the ld. Advocate's plea that the judgment cited before the Commissioner ought to have been accepted, we notice that the plea is correct in the light of the Apex Court judgment cited in the case of UOI v. K.M. S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and/or Minister cannot sit in appeal or revision over those decisions. At the highest, the Government may appeal to the Tribunal itself for a review, if circumstances so warrant. But the Government would be bound by the ultimate decision of the Tribunal. 9. We fail to understand the apprehension expressed by the learned Counsel that there may be a law and order situation. Once an Expert Body has considered the impact of the film on the public and has cleared the film, it is no excuse to say that there may be a law and order situation. It is for the concerned State Government to see that the law and order is maintained. In any democratic Society there are bound to be divergent views. Merely because a small section of the society has a dif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
