9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (11) TMI 155X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant to permit the respondent to clear their entire consignment of "Kafbin" from their factory without any let or hindrance and without imposition of any excise duty until, of course the time, if ever, the exemption is withdrawn, or the petitioner happens to change the constitution of "Kafbin" so as to render it non-Ayurvedic. 2.Aggrieved against this order the present appeal has been preferred by the appellant. The brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of the appeal are that the Assistant Collector, Central Excise by its order dated 23-6-1993 disallowed the claim for exemption for the cough syrup "Kafbin" claimed by the petitioner to be an Ayurvedic medicine. Under Tariff Item No. 3003.10 of Chapter 30 of the Tariff Act of 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny difference to the Ayurvedic preparation and held that the present Ayurvedic preparation is not exigible to tariff. The approach of the learned Single Judge was not correct. He should not have interfered and better have left the matter to the Appellate Authority to adjudicate specialy where such disputed questions are involved in the matter. However, now the controversy has been resolved by the Board of Taxes and clarified the position by issuing circular wherein this question was examined by the Board and the Board held : Having regard to"4. the above, the Board is of the view that the benefit of exemption under S. No. 3 of Notification No. 75/94-C.E. should not be denied to Ayurvedic medicines if they are manufactured in accordance wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng Authority may exempt the preparation from the tariff. The learned Counsel has submitted that the decision of the Board is binding on the sub-ordinate authorities. In support of this contention the learned Counsel has invited our attention to a decision of the Apex Court in Collector of Central Excise, Bombay v. Jayant Dalal Private Limited [1996 (88) E.L.T. 638 (S.C.) = (1997) 10 SCC 402] wherein it has been held that the circular issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs is binding on the sub-ordinate authorities. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order and direct that the petitioner may obtain a certificate as contemplated in the circular of the Board dated 3-4-96 and the same may be submitted to the authorities and if the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
