9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (3) TMI 687X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nufacture of bulk drugs without payment of duty. Bulk drugs were exempt from payment of duty under Notification No. 234/86-C.E., dated 3-4-1986. When intermediate products are used in the manufacture of exempted final product duty has to be discharged on the intermediate products as the exemption contained in 217/86 was not available to such intermediate products. The allegation of the department is that during above said period, the appellants did not discharge the duty on the intermediate products. 2. In the impugned order duty has been demanded on Pyrantal Citrate, Disodium Pamoate and Epoxide produced and cleared for captive consumption during the above said period. Hence the appeal. 3. The appellants contend that - (a) Duty a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... product is time barred as the assessee had mentioned the fact that this product was one of the intermediate products manufactured by him while filing the classification list. However, the chart annexed to the impugned order shows that duty is demanded on this product as well. The demand in respect of this product therefore needs to be set aside even if it is held that the larger period of limitation is invokable in respect of the other two products. 5. It was further urged that the product, Epoxide has no shelf life and therefore is not marketable. What is not marketable is not excisable. Duty therefore on this product should not have been demanded. 6. With reference to (b) above it was urged that extended period of limitation is not in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as found that Epoxide was brought from another factory to the appellants premises and from their the product was sent to another sister concern of the appellants. Even in the case of Pyrantal Citrate it was brought out, that the product was available as an organic chemical in the market and were sold by the appellant themselves on occasions. 9. Heard both sides and perused the records. 10. We accept the contention of the ld. Advocate that duty demanded on Pyrantal Citrate and Epoxide for the period 1-4-87 to 18-8-87 is barred by limitation. We also accept the contention that the chart annexed to the impugned order has taken the production and clearance of the above said products for the month of March 1988 for the purpose of calculating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
