9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 339X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Ahibaran, Addl. Comm. (AR) JUDGEMENT Per: P R Chandrasekharan: 1. The appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. AT/46/M-II/2004 dated 28/07/2004 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals),Mumbai. 2. Vide the impugned order, the learned appellate authority has upheld the duty demand of Rs. 3,11,776/- along with interest thereon and also imposition of equivalent amount of pena ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the case of Bayer Diagnostics India Ltd., Vs. CCE Vadodara - 2001 (133) ELT 140 (Tri-Mumbai) in support of his contention. Alternatively, it is argued that inasmuch as the appellant had discharged the excise duty liability before issue of show-cause notice. The question of issue of a notice and imposing penalties does not arise at all and therefore, he pleads for setting aside the equivalent amo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... table, the question of mentioning a name, its price, application and dosage would not have arisen at all. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the contention that the goods are not marketable. As regards the reliance place on Bayer Diagnostics India Ltd. case (cited supra), the facts of the said case were completely different and distinguishable. In that case, the goods under clearance were diag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore the issue of show-cause notice. In the present case the appellant has fulfilled this condition and therefore, the question of imposition of penalty under Section 11AC would not arise at all. Accordingly, we set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant. But for the above modification, the impugned order is upheld. Thus, the appeal is partly allowed. (Operative part of the order pronounced in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
