Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. German Remedies Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, Mumbai ... on 17 January, 2008
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI. APPEAL NO. E/997 & 998/06-Mum (Arising out of Order-in-appeal No.BR/189 & 190/M-IV/05 dated 30.11.2005 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Mumbai IV) For approval and signature: Shri M.V.Ravindran, Honble Member (Judicial) Shri K.K.Agarwal, Honble Member (Technical) ======================================================
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? 2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the : No CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : authorities?
====================================================== M/s. German Remedies Ltd. Appellant Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai IV Respondent Appearance:
Shri. Bharat Raichandani Advocate For Appellant Shri. S.G.Dewalwar SDR For Respondent CORAM:
Shri M.V.Ravindran, Honble Member (Judicial) Shri K.K.Agarwal, Honble Member (Technical) Date of Hearing : 17.1.2008 Date of Decision : 17.1.2008 O R D E R NO.
Per : Shri M.V.Ravindran, Member (Judicial) :
1. These two appeals are directed against order-in-appeal No.BR/189 & 190/M-IV/05 dated 30.11.2005
2. Heard both sides.
3. The issue involved in this case is regarding the confiscation of imported goods on whome stickers were affixed showing that the goods in question have been marketed by appellant in India and putting rubber stamps showing the MRP, would amount to manufacture or not.
4. We find that in an identical issue and in respect of very same appellant, the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in appeal no. E/438/2003 reported at 2003 (162) ELT 429 (Tri. - Del.) has held that the activity of affixing stickers showing MRP and marketing pattern, in India would not amount to manufacture. Revenue being aggrieved by the order, moved a Civil Appeal (No.145 of 2004) before the Apex Court and the Apex Court vide their order dated 19.10.2006 disposed of the said appeal as no orders required to be passed as the issue is covered in the case of Johnson & Johnson Ltd.
5. As such, we find that the issue is no more resintegra. Without going into any other issues, respectfully following the order as reported at 2003 (162) ELT 429, the appeals are allowed and impugned orders are set aside.
(Pronounced and dictated in court) (K.K.Agarwal) Member (Technical) (M.V.Ravindran ) Member (Judicial) .ts. / 20099706170108MM