2005 (3) TMI 207

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s. 2. The appellant, manufacture goods falling under Chapter 29. The dispute relates to eligibility to Notification No. 8/96-C.E. dt. 23-7-96 to Roxythromycin cleared during September 1996 - December 1996 and Nimesulide cleared during September 1996 - December 1997. Exemption under the said Notifications is available to goods falling under the above chapter if they are mentioned in Indian Pharma .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sion. Admittedly in the Second Edition of European Pharmacopoeia Roxythromycin was not mentioned. The effective date of the third Edition of European Pharmacopoeia was 1-1-1997. Therefore the Commissioner is right in holding that Roxythromycin was not included in any of the Pharmacopoeia prior to 1-1-97 and therefore prior to this date the concessional rate of duty is not available to this product .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ia is eligible for the benefit of concessional rate of duty during the relevant period. The Tribunal in the case of CCE, Hyderabad v. Reddy Labs [2004 (175) E.L.T. 649 (Tribunal) = 2004 (65) RLT 78] held that the said pharmacopoeia is an official Pharmacopoeia of Great Britain. On merits the appellants are entitled for the exemption. We also observe that the appellants filed a declaration under Ru .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X