9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 309X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Member (Technical) Shri Rajesh Ostwal, Advocate for Appellant Shri Sanjay Hasija, Supdt. (AR) for Respondent ORDER Per Ramesh Nair The issue involved in the present appeals is valuation of physician samples manufactured and supplied either on loan license basis or on job-work basis. In the case of Okasa Pvt. Ltd., physician samples were manufactured and sold on principal to principal basis u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant submits that the appellant in the present case though manufactured physician samples but they are not the owner of the goods, they are not supplying physician samples free of cost in the market. In the case of Okasa Pvt. Ltd., the sale is on principal to principal basis. Therefore, the transaction value is squarely covered under Section 4(1)(a) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, hence th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... STAT-DEL-CE 4. On the other hand, Shri Sanjay Hasija, learned Supdt. (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue, reiterates the findings of the impugned order. He emphasized on the Board s Circular No. 813/10/2005-CX dated 25.4.2005, wherein it was clarified that in case of free sample, the value should be determined under Rule 4 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules, 2000. Accordingly, the lower au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se Valuation Rules, 2000 shall apply only in those cases where the manufacturer manufacturing the physician samples and they themselves supplying free sample in the market. In the present case, all the three appellants are not supplying physician samples free of cost either in case of job-work basis or in the sale basis, the goods are sold to the principal. In such case, irrespective it is physici ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of Section 4. In both type of clearances in any circumstances, Rule 4 valuation shall not apply. 6. As per our above discussions, we are of the considered view that valuation proposed by the Revenue in case of all the three appellants, are incorrect and demand confirmed on that basis is not sustainable. We, therefore, set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeals. ( Pronounced in Court o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
