CCE Vs. TRINITY PHARMACEUTICALS (P) LTD.
LAWS(CE)-2005-6-149
CUSTOMS EXCISE AND GOLD(CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on
June 16,2005
CCE
Appellant
VERSUS
Trinity Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd.
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
CHERYL LABORATORIES (P) LTD. VS. CCE,HYDERABAD [REFERRED TO]SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES V. CCE,SURAT -II [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE MEERUT VS. UNIVERSAL GLASS LTD [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF C EX VS. CHARAK PHARMACEUTICALS [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
T.K. Jayaraman, Member (J) -
(1.)THIS appeal has been filed by Revenue against the OIA dated 04.01.2002 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs (Appeals), Cochin.
(2.)THE issue involved in this appeal is regarding the valuation of Physician's Samples for free distribution among Doctors through Medical Representatives. The Commissioner (Appeals) has held that it is more appropriate to adopt the Rule 6(b)(ii) of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1975 for valuation of the physician's samples as the adoption of Rule 6(b)(i) is not proper. He has given the following reasons in the impugned order: -
(i) The packing of the goods, which has a considerable influence in the assessable value of the final product, is different.
(ii) The post manufacturing expenses which have to be loaded into the assessable value of the final product are also different in the two types of goods.
(iii) The cost value of the samples are loaded into the goods on sale.
(3.)REVENUE is aggrieved over the impugned order on the following grounds:
(i) Cost construction method is to be consideration as a last resort only when the sale value of comparable goods is not available and the value of the products cannot be ascertained in any other manner as provided in the Rules.
(ii) In the following decisions, Honb'le CEGAT has held that the value of physician's samples are to be arrived at based on comparable price of the same goods as provided in Rule 6(b)(i) of the CE Valuation Rules, 1975.
(a) CCE, Mumbai -I Vs. Charak Pharmaceuticals - 2001 (127) ELT 748 (Tri. -Mum)
(b) Cheryl Laboratories (P) Ltd. Vs. CCE, Hyderabad - 1997 (93) ELT 129 (Tribunal) In the Cheryl Laboratories case, the CEGAT has further held that for valuation of physician's free samples, no adjustment is called for on account of physician's samples being supplied free of cost and also profit motive has no bearing on the valuation under Rule 6(b)(i) of the Valuation Rules, 1975.
Shri L. Narasimha Murthy, the learned SDR represented the Revenue and Shri K. Krishnan Kutty, the learned Consultant appeared for the Respondent.
(2.)THE issue involved in this appeal is regarding the valuation of Physician's Samples for free distribution among Doctors through Medical Representatives. The Commissioner (Appeals) has held that it is more appropriate to adopt the Rule 6(b)(ii) of Central Excise Valuation Rules, 1975 for valuation of the physician's samples as the adoption of Rule 6(b)(i) is not proper. He has given the following reasons in the impugned order: -
(i) The packing of the goods, which has a considerable influence in the assessable value of the final product, is different.
(ii) The post manufacturing expenses which have to be loaded into the assessable value of the final product are also different in the two types of goods.
(iii) The cost value of the samples are loaded into the goods on sale.
(3.)REVENUE is aggrieved over the impugned order on the following grounds:
(i) Cost construction method is to be consideration as a last resort only when the sale value of comparable goods is not available and the value of the products cannot be ascertained in any other manner as provided in the Rules.
(ii) In the following decisions, Honb'le CEGAT has held that the value of physician's samples are to be arrived at based on comparable price of the same goods as provided in Rule 6(b)(i) of the CE Valuation Rules, 1975.
(a) CCE, Mumbai -I Vs. Charak Pharmaceuticals - 2001 (127) ELT 748 (Tri. -Mum)
(b) Cheryl Laboratories (P) Ltd. Vs. CCE, Hyderabad - 1997 (93) ELT 129 (Tribunal) In the Cheryl Laboratories case, the CEGAT has further held that for valuation of physician's free samples, no adjustment is called for on account of physician's samples being supplied free of cost and also profit motive has no bearing on the valuation under Rule 6(b)(i) of the Valuation Rules, 1975.
Shri L. Narasimha Murthy, the learned SDR represented the Revenue and Shri K. Krishnan Kutty, the learned Consultant appeared for the Respondent.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.