9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 301X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ? - HELD THAT:- The Hon ble Supreme Court in MEDLEY PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE [ 2011 (1) TMI 13 - SUPREME COURT] has held that physician samples have to be valued on pro-rata basis for the relevant period. The impugned order is upheld and the appeal being devoid of merit, accordingly is dismissed. - DR. D.M. MISRA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MRS. R. BHAGY ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red attracts valuation under Section 4/4A of Central Excise Act, 1944. Show-cause notices were issued on 20.10.2008 for the period from October 2007 to May 2008 demanding differential duty of Rs. 7,33,036/- with interest and proposal for penalty. On adjudication demands were confirmed. Aggrieved by the said order, they filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). Hence the present appeal. 3. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... taking note of the principle of law settled by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C.Ex. Ahmedabad-II 2008 (232) E.L.T. 245 (Tri.-LB) and Hon ble Supreme Court in Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex. Cus., Daman - 2011 (263) E.L.T. 641 (S.C) held that the physician samples cleared adopting Rule 8 of the Central Excise (Valuation) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... our view, this issue need not detain us long in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise v. M/s. Bal Pharma [Civil Appeal No. 1697 of 2006] [2010 (259) E.L.T. 10 (S.C.)]. This Court has upheld the conclusion of the Tribunal that the physician s samples have to be valued on pro-rata basis. The Tribunal, while arriving at the aforesaid conclusion, had relied u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the cost of manufacture. Such a determination of the assessable value has not been accepted by the Supreme Court. The Commissioner (Appeals), therefore, committed no illegality. 6. We do not find any reason not to follow the judgment of this Tribunal in Amazon Drugs Pvt. Ltd s case. Consequently, following the said judgment, the impugned order is upheld and the appeal being devoid of merit, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
