9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (8) TMI 892X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h S.K. Gadhok, Consultant, for the Appellant. Shri K. Srivastava, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.C. Jain, Vice President]. Following questions are involved in this appeal : (i) Whether the product Keshamrit Shampoo manufactured by the appellants herein, which is admittedly a KVIC unit will be liable to duty as a shampoo under Chapter 33 or as an ayurvedic medicine u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ? (vi) Whether the interest is also liable to be paid on the duty demand under Section 11AB. 2. We have heard both sides. On the first issue regarding classification, we observe from the label on the product used by the appellant for selling their product that it is not held out as a medicine. It is held out to the consumer as a plain and simple hair wash, that is, as a shampoo and it is al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gned period under dispute as required under Rule 174 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, and hence, failed to discharge their statutory duties and are liable for penal action under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944. We observe that the finding of the adjudicating authority does not say that the appellants herein wilfully mis-stated or suppressed anything or contravened any Rules with an in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the fact that there is no element of mens rea in evading duty. Consequently we set aside the penalties imposed on the appellant unit as also on Shri B.B. Pandey. 6. As regards confiscation of the goods, we have already held that the appellants did not have any mens rea, therefore, it will not be justified to confiscate the goods in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. Consequently, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
