Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
Maneesh Pharmaceuticals P. Ltd. vs Commissioner Of C. Ex. on 17 October, 2003
Equivalent citations: 2004(163)ELT365(TRI-MUMBAI)
ORDER C. Satapathy, Member (T)
1. Heard both sides. These three appeals are against the same impugned order and involves the question as to whether for the purpose of Notification No. 48/77-C.E., dated 1-4-1977, goods exported under bond can be considered as duty paid clearances. The learned Advocate for the appellants states that the lower authorities have included exports under claim for rebate as duty paid clearances and claims that in view of the decision in the case of HPCL v. CCE - 1995 (77) E.L.T. 256 (S.C.), export under bond and export under claim for rebate have to be treated at par. He also cites the case of N.B. Sanjana, Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Bombay and Ors. v. The Elphinstone Spinning & Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. - 1978 (2) E.L.T. (J 399), where it is held that duty paid means duty ought to have been paid. It is his claim that the goods exported under bond have to be treated as duty paid since the duty required to be paid is nil. We have also heard Shri R.P. Pardeshi, learned J.D.R.
2. After hearing both sides and perusal of the case records including cited case laws, we find that Notification No. 48/77 exempts samples of medicaments to the extent of 4% of the total duty paid clearances of all types of medicines during the preceding month. There is no restriction in the notification that clearances of exported medicines will not be taken into account. In fact, the lower authorities have already included medicines exported under claim of rebate in the computation of duty paid clearances. Following the ratio of the case laws cited, it is permissible to treat export under bond as duty paid clearance, since no duty is required to be paid on such export.
3. In view of our finding as above, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal with consequential benefit to the appellants.