9911796707
TMI Blog1970 (12) TMI 34X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1, being Act 14 of 1961 amended entries in the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 by inserting item No. 14E and imposed the Central Excise duty on patent and proprietary medicines at 10 per cent, ad valorem. The petitioner in this case has asserted that pre-excise book stock, as it stood on the 28th February, 1961, was declared by the petitioner to the Excise Authority as non dutiable goods and clearances of the said goods were allowed from time to time to the petitioner under gate passes issued under relevant rules of the Central Excise Rules 1944. Thereafter pursuant to the verbal requisition made on the 19th August, 1961, from the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Calcutta, the petitioner by a letter sought permi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed fresh labelling at the time of sale. The Superintendent found 20 items of unlabelled injections in the cold storage wrongly entered in R.G. 1. as manufactured by them and he accordingly directed these should be struck off the R.G. 1. and kept as unmanufactured stock in the factory. Thereafter the petitioner made certain representations. On March, 13, 1962, a demand notice was issued by the respondent No. 4 claiming payment of Rs. 12,646.36 np under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The petitioner protested against the demand of duty of stock and claimed withdrawal. There were representations and appeals against the demand to deposit the amount of moneys. It is not necessary for me to advert to them in detail in the view I have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se duties. That position is abundantly clear from the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of 1978 (2) E.L.T. (J 328) (S.C.) = AIR 1967 SC 1564 (supra). It, however, appears to me that the appropriate Rule in this case would be Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Therefore, if the goods in question are excisable goods and if they have been removed from the place where they were manufactured or any premises appurtenant thereto, then these goods are liable under Rule 9(2) to the imposition of excise levy, even subsequent to removal, at any time. In this case it appears to me that after coming into operation of the Finance Act, 1961, which introduced item No. 14E in the First Schedule to the Central Excise Act 1944 these goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ture includes any process incidental or ancillary to the completion of a manufactured product. By the Finance Act of 1962 the definition was extended to include as follows : in relation to patent or proprietary medicines as defined" in Item No. 14E of the first Schedule and in relation to cosmetics and toilet preparations as defined in Item No. 14E of that Schedule includes the conversion of powder into tablets or capsules, the labelling or re-labelling of containers intended for consumers and re-packing from bulk packs to retail packs or the adoption of any other treatment to render the product marketable to the consumer." This is of course, as notices before, was introduced subsequently, that is to say, by the Finance Act, 1962. The d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... should be adhered to was the definition and the description provided in the Central Excise Act and according to Mr. Dutta such definition did not include labelling as the manufacture of drugs. In support of his contention Mr. Dutta drew my attention to the decision In the case of Union of India v. Delhi Cloth General Mills Co. Ltd. - 1977 (1) E.L.T. (J 199) (S.C.) = AIR 1963 SC 791. He also drew my attention to the.decision of S.B. Sugar Mills v. Union of India, 1978 (2) E.L.T. (J 336) (S.C.) = AIR 1968 SC 922. According to Mr. Roy Chowdhury, learned Counsel for the respondents, labelling was manufacture in this case because, he contended, first that it was a process incidental and ancillary to the manufacture of drugs medicines and secon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to ascertaion what the section meant, though those other sections are not incorporated into the new Act. I do not mean that if there was in the original Act a section not incorporated, which came by way of a proviso or exception on that which was incorporated that should be referred to; but all others, including the interpretation clauses, if there be one, may be referred to." Therefore, in my opinion it is not possible to rule out the definition provided in the Drugs Act, 1940 in construing what is manufacture of patent and proprietary medicine. In that view of the matter I am of the opinion that labelling is manufacture, when labelling is completed, manufacture is completed, it is in this context relevant also to refer to the observati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
