2009 (6) TMI 974

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... late Tribunal). 2. Heard Mr. B. Ravichandran, learned standing counsel for the appellant. 3. The respondent is a manufacturer of patent and proprietary medicines falling under tariff sub-heading No. 3003.39 of Central Excise Tariff. During the financial years 1994-1995 and 1995-1996 the respondent did not register themselves with the Central Excise Department, on the ground that their .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tment filed a further appeal before CESTAT. The Tribunal dismissed the further appeal, compelling the Department to come up with the present appeal. 7. As rightly observed by the Tribunal, both the Appellate Authority and the Tribunal found on facts that the respondent was entitled to a discount on free samples and some other items. On these findings of fact, there is any scope hardly for th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X