Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Collector Of Central Excise vs Paraon Ltd. on 19 November, 1999
Equivalent citations: 2000(116)ELT500(TRI-DEL)
ORDER G.R. Sharma, Member (T)
1. This is an appeal filed by Revenue on the ground that Classification List No. 4/92-93, dated 1-4-1992 filed by the respondent was finally approved by the Assistant Collector under Rule 173B of Central Excise Rules. Since the said classification list has not been set aside or stayed, therefore, the classification list approved by the Assistant Collector is valid and binding; that the validity of the classification list has not been disputed by the assessee.
2. Revenue has also submitted that as per the explanation at the end of Notification No. 31/88, dated 1-3-1988, the expression 'bulk drug' shall have the same meaning assigned to it in the Drugs (Price Control) Order, 1987; that the Assistant Collector has in his order observed that the products in question are not specified in the Second Schedule to DPCC and as such not entitled to the benefit under Notification No. 31/88, dated 1-3-1988 as amended. It has, therefore, been prayed that the order-in-appeal passed by the ld. Collector (Appeals) may be set aside and the order-in-original passed by the Asstt. Collector may be restored.
3. Dr. Ravindra Babu, ld. DR submits that Notification No. 31/88, dated 1-3-1988 exempts goods specified in Column 2 of the Table annexed falling under Chapters 28,29 or 30 of the schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 as is in excess of the amount calculated at the rate specified in the corresponding entry. He submits that the respondents herein are engaged in the manufacture of PP Medicines; that they filed a Classification List for clearing inputs under Rule 57F(1)(ii) claiming concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 31/88 for Paracetamol, Chloropheniramine, Phenylephrine hydro-chloride. Ld. DR submitted that Notification No. 31/88-C.E., dated 1-3-1988 was applicable to bulk drugs. He submitted that explanation to this Notification says that the expression bulk drugs shall have the same meaning assigned to it in the Drug (Price Control) Order, 1987. He submitted that bulk drugs have been defined as bulk drugs means any substance including pharmaceutical, chemical, biological or plant product or medicinal gas conforming to pharmacopocial or other standards accepted under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, which is used as such, or as an ingredient in any formulation. He submits that there are certain schedules for the purpose. He submits that bulk drugs have been mentioned in the First Schedule which pertains to bulk drugs required for the following National Health Programmes used in Category I formulation appearing in Third Schedule. Ld. DR submits that Second Schedule of bulk drugs gives a detailed list of items covered. He submits that since the bulk drugs do not cover the present goods in First Schedule, therefore, naturally the said goods are required to be examined in the light of 'other bulk drugs'; that other bulk drugs can be only those bulk drugs included in Second Schedule. He submitted that the admitted position is that the appellants have claimed benefit as 'other bulk drugs'. He submits that there are only two schedules of bulk drugs and after a particular case is not covered by the First Schedule, it should necessarily be covered by the Second Schedule. Therefore, 'other bulk drugs' carrying concessional rate of duty mentioned against S. No. 2 of Notification No. 31/88 are in Schedule 2. He submits that a scrutiny of the Second Schedule shows that except Chloropheniramine no other bulk drug manufactured by the appellant is covered by the Second Schedule. He, therefore, submits that out of three items only one is covered and therefore, benefit, if any, will be admissible only to one product i.e. Chloropheniramine. He, therefore, prays that the appeal may be allowed.
4. None appeared for the Respondents. However, they have made some some written submissions in which they have submitted that the impugned order set aside the Classification List approved by the Asstt. Collector; that since the Classification Lists have been set aside, therefore, the Classification Lists approved by the Asstt. Collector are not binding on the respondent. They have also submitted that the issues raised by the appellant have been appropriately dealt with by the Collector (Appeals) and therefore, they have prayed that the impugned order may be upheld and the appeal may be rejected.
5. We have heard the rival submissions. We find that the issue is a limited one and that is whether the three items on which the benefit of Notification No. 31/88 is claimed, are eligible for the benefit. On perusal of the Notification, we find that 'other bulk drugs' attract a duty of 5% ad valorem. We have also perused the Drugs (Price Control) Order defining the bulk drug. We also note that bulk drugs are stated in the Schedule. There are four Schedules. Out of these four Schedules, the heading for two Schedules is bulk drugs. Therefore, the important question that arises is that what does the expression 'other bulk drugs' mean. On perusal of the First Schedule, we find that Schedule one covers bulk drugs meant for National T.B. Eradication Programme, National Leprosy Eradication Programme, National Trachoma Control Programme and National Programme for Control of Blindness and Programme for Prevention of Dehydration under Ort, National Malaria Eradication Programme, National Filaria Eradication Programme. Thus only such bulk drugs which are required for these programmes are in the First Schedule. The Seccnd Schedule also talks of bulk drugs, therefore, the intention of 'other bulk drugs' in the Notification should cover the bulk drugs mentioned in Second Schedule as they cannot come under the First Schedule. On perusal of the Second Schedule, we note that Chloropheniramine is mentioned in the Schedule. Other two items are not mentioned. Since this is the only other Schedule for bulk drugs, therefore, it can be taken as covering 'other bulk drugs'. In this view of the matter, we hold that the benefit of Notification No. 31/88 will be applicable only to Chloropheniramine mentioned at S. No. 12 of the Second Schedule and that the benefit of Notification No. 31/88 shall not be available to the other two drugs. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.