9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (10) TMI 98X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntermediate or pharmaceutical in nature. As this factual position is not disputed, it becomes clear that the citric acid manufactured by the respondents is entitled to the benefit of the Notifications. In such cases where the factual position is admitted, no question arises of ascertaining the end-use. We, therefore, dismiss this appeal on this short point. - 9346 of 1994 - - - Dated:- 10-10-2002 - S.N. Variava and Brijesh Kumar, JJ. [Order]. - This appeal is against the judgment of the Bombay High Court dated 21st October, 1992. The question before the Court was whether citric acid manufactured by the respondents herein was covered by Notification No. 55/1975-C.E., dated 1st March, 1975, as amended by Notification No. 62/1978, d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, the Bombay High Court held as follows : "Shri Desai referred to the decision of the Supreme Court reported in 1988 (38) E.L.T. (Collector of C.E., Guntur v. Andhra Sugar Ltd.) to urge that the requirement of end-use though not built into the exemption notification, is not only implied but also becomes imperative in a situation when the product has uses other than drug intermediate. The learned counsel submitted that this is the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court. The submission is not accurate. On careful perusal of the entire judgment of the Supreme Court, it is obvious that the observations set out in the head-note are not the findings or conclusions of the Supreme Court. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the Acetic An ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent in the revisional jurisdiction and which was noted by the single Judge of the Karnataka High Court. In our judgment, the reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in these circumstances is not accurate. In our judgment, the petitioners are entitled to the relief." 5.In our view, this civil appeal can be disposed of on a very short point. In this case, as already mentioned above, the Department did not deny that the citric acid manufactured by the respondents was a pharmacopoeial standard acid. The High Court also records, in paragraph 7 of the impugned judgment, that the Department did not challenge the finding of the Tribunal that the product was a drug, drug intermediate or pharmaceutical in nature. As this factual position is n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
