Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.46 seconds)
Documents citing Commissioner Of Central Excise vs Trinity Pharmaceuticals (I) Pvt. Ltd. on 4 October, 2005

Blue Cross Laboratories Ltd. vs Commr. Of C. Ex. on 29 August, 2006

(a) The decision of the Tribunal in Commissioner of Central Excise, Calicut v. Trinity Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. (supra) was cited to point out that after noticing the decisions in Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai-I v. Charak Pharmaceuticals (supra) and Cheryl Laboratories (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad (supra), the Tribunal came to the conclusion that even though, the Revenue in its appeal relied on two decisions of the Tribunal, the Tribunal was of the view that the physician's samples and the goods cleared in wholesale cannot be considered as comparable goods, in view of the Supreme Court's decision that comparable goods should be as far as possible identical goods.
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Indian Drugs Manufacturer'S ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) Through The Joint ... on 28 September, 2006

d) Relying upon the decisions in the case of Sun Pharmaceutical Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise , Commissioner of Central Excise v. Trinity Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. and Medley Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise , it is submitted that the consistent judicial view taken in the matter during the period from 1975 to 1/7/2000 is that the physicians free samples are liable to be valued by applying the method applicable to captively consumed goods. Even after the introduction of the concept of valuation based on the transaction value, the physicians free samples have been valued by applying the method applicable to captively consumed goods as per circular No. 643 dated 1/7/2002. Therefore, the circular No. 813 dated 25/4/2005 issued by the Board, directing that the physicians free samples be valued under Rule 4 of 2000 Rules is totally erroneous, contrary to the judicial decisions prevailing for more than three decades and hence liable to be quashed and set aside.
Bombay High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 3 - J P Devadhar - Full Document

Madley Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs Commnr Of Central Excise&Customs, ... on 14 January, 2011

41) Now coming to the valuation of the physician samples for the purpose of levy of excise duty, in our view, this issue need not detain us long in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise vs. M/s. Bal Pharma [Civil Appeal No. 1697 of 2006]. This Court has upheld the conclusion of the Tribunal that the physician's samples have to be valued on pro-rata basis. The Tribunal, while arriving at the aforesaid conclusion, had relied upon its earlier decision in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Calicut vs. Trinity Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., reported as 2005 (188) ELT 48, which has been accepted by the department. Therefore, we hold that physician samples have to be valued on pro-rata basis for the relevant period.
Supreme Court of India Cites 49 - Cited by 64 - H L Dattu - Full Document

Madley Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs Commnr Of Central Excise&Customs;, ... on 14 January, 2011

41) Now coming to the valuation of the physician samples for the purpose of levy of excise duty, in our view, this issue need not detain us long in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise vs. M/s. Bal Pharma [Civil Appeal No. 1697 of 2006]. This Court has upheld the conclusion of the Tribunal that the physician's samples have to be valued on pro-rata basis. The Tribunal, while arriving at the aforesaid conclusion, had relied upon its earlier decision in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Calicut vs. Trinity Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., reported as 2005 (188) ELT 48, which has been accepted by the department. Therefore, we hold that physician samples have to be valued on pro-rata basis for the relevant period.
Supreme Court of India Cites 49 - Cited by 0 - H L Dattu - Full Document

Amazon Drugs Pvt Ltd vs Bangalore Service Tax- I on 14 July, 2023

41. Now coming to the valuation of the physician samples for the purpose of levy of excise duty, in our view, this issue need not detain us long in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise v. M/s. Bal Pharma [Civil Appeal No. 1697 of 2006] [2010 (259) E.L.T. 10 (S.C.)]. This Court has upheld the conclusion of the Tribunal that the physician's samples have to be valued on pro-rata basis. The Tribunal, while 8 E/1652/2010 arriving at the aforesaid conclusion, had relied upon its earlier decision in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Calicut v. Trinity Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., reported as 2005 (188) E.L.T. 48, which has been accepted by the department. Therefore, we hold that physician samples have to be valued on pro-rata basis for the relevant period."
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - D Gupta - Full Document

Elvina Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs Belgaum on 30 August, 2023

"41. Now coming to the valuation of the physician samples for the purpose of levy of excise duty, in our view, this issue need not detain us long in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise v. M/s. Bal Pharma [Civil Appeal No. 1697 of 2006] [2010 (259) E.L.T. 10 (S.C.)]. This Court has upheld the conclusion of the Tribunal that the physician's samples have to be valued on pro-rata basis. The Tribunal, while arriving at the aforesaid conclusion, had relied upon its earlier decision in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Calicut v. Trinity Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., reported as 2005 (188) E.L.T. 48, which has been accepted by the department. Therefore, we hold that physician samples have to be valued on pro-rata basis for the relevant period."
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Elvina Pharmaceuticals Ltd vs Belgaum on 31 October, 2023

"41. Now coming to the valuation of the physician samples for the purpose of levy of excise duty, in our view, this issue need not detain us long in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise v. M/s. Bal Pharma [Civil Appeal No. 1697 of 2006] [2010 (259) E.L.T. 10 (S.C.)]. This Court has upheld the conclusion of the Tribunal that the physician's samples have to be valued on pro-rata basis. The Tribunal, while arriving at the aforesaid conclusion, had relied upon its earlier decision in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Calicut v. Trinity Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., reported as 2005 (188) E.L.T. 48, which has been accepted by the department. Therefore, we hold that physician samples have to be valued on pro-rata basis for the relevant period."
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 Next