SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RUMA PAL, S.B. SINHA, JJ.
DABUR INDIA LTD. -APPELLANT
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MEERUT -RESPONDENT
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 351 OF 2001,
DECIDED ON AUGUST 28, 2003
CENTRAL EXCISE - HERBAL EXTRACTS - CHAPTER 13, CHAPTER 30 - 13.01, 13.90, 30.30 - The court discussed the classification of herbal extracts under Chapter 13 and Chapter 30 of the Central Excise Act. The key legal provisions discussed include the definitions of medicaments and the interpretation of the CBEC circular. The court emphasized that the extracts with therapeutic value should be classified under Tariff Entry 30.03 and not 13.01.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant manufactured medicinal products out of herbal extracts. The dispute revolved around the classification of the extracts under Chapter 13 or Chapter 30 of the Central Excise Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the extracts with therapeutic value should be classified under Tariff Entry 30.03 and not 13.01. The decisions of the Tribunal and Commissioner were set aside, and the impugned demands were quashed.
Issues: The issues included the classification of herbal extracts under the Central Excise Act, the interpretation of the CBEC circular, and the applicability of excise duty.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that extracts with therapeutic value should be classified under Tariff Entry 30.03 and not 13.01, based on the interpretation of the CBEC circular and the definitions of medicaments.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the decisions of the Tribunal and Commissioner were set aside. The impugned demands were quashed.
ORDER
1. THE APPELLANT MANUFACTURES MEDICINAL PRODUCTS OUT OF HERBAL EXTRACTS.
THE QUESTIONS WHICH HAVE ARISEN IN THIS APPEAL, INTER ALIA, ARE WHETHER THE EXTRACTS WERE GOODS FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE CENTRAL EXCISE ACT AND IF SO, WHETHER THEY WERE CLASSIFIABLE UNDER CHAPTER 13 OR 30 OF THE ACT.
2. THE APPELLANT CARRIES ON ITS BUSINESS BOTH IN WEST BENGAL AS WELL AS IN UTTAR PRADESH. DEMANDS WERE RAISED IN RESPECT OF THE PERIOD 1-8-1990 TO 28-2-1994 BY REVENUE AUTHORITIES IN BOTH THE STATES ON THE BASIS THAT THE HERBAL EXTRACTS WERE LEVIABLE TO EXCISE DUTY UNDER CHAPTER 13. AS FAR AS WEST BENGAL WAS CONCERNED, THE RELEVANT ENTRIES WERE CONSTRUED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND IT WAS HELD THAT THE GOODS WERE PROPERLY CLASSIFIABLE UNDER CHAPTER 30 UNDER TARIFF ITEM 30.03. THE RATE OF DUTY AT THAT POINT OF TIME WAS NIL. HE ACCORDINGLY DROPPED THE PROCEEDINGS.
3. AS FAR AS UTTAR PRADESH WAS CONCERNED, HOWEVER, THE COMMISSIONER DECIDED THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE APPELLANT HOLDING THAT THE EXTRACTS WERE PROPERLY CLASSIFIABLE UNDER CHAPTER 13. THE APPELLANTS FURTHER APPEAL TO THE TRIBUNAL FROM THIS DECISION WAS REJECTED AND THAT IS THE ORDER IMPUGNED BEFORE US.
4. THE RELEVANT ENTRIES IN CHAPTER 13 ARE REPRODUCED BELOW:
"CHAPTER 13
LAC; GUMS, RESINS AND OTHER VEGETABLE SAPS AND EXTRACTS
HEADING NO. SUB-HEADING DESCRIPTION OF ROODS RATE OF DUTY
(1) (2) (3) (4)
13.01 LAC; GUMS, RESINS AND
OTHER VEGETABLE SAPS
AND EXTRACTS
1301.10 - LAC NIL
1301.90 - OTHER 15%”
5. THE REVENUES CONTENTION THAT THE EXTRACTS IN QUESTION WERE PROPERLY CLASSIFIABLE UNDER SUB-HEADING 1301.90 AND DUTY WAS LEVIABLE ON THE APPLICANT UNDER THE ACT IN RESPECT OF THE EXTRACTS AT 15%.
6. AS FAR AS CHAPTER 30 IS CONCERNED IT DEALS WITH PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCTS. THE ENTRY ON WHICH RELIANCE HAS BEEN PLACED BY THE APPELLANT IS SUB-HEADING 3003.30. IT READS:
HEADING NO. SUB-HEADING NO. DESCRIPTION OF GOODS RATE OF DUTY
(1) (2) (3) (4)
30.30 MEDICAMENTS (INCLUDING
VETERINARY MEDICAMENTS)
3003.30 - MEDICAMENTS, INCLUDING
THOSE USED IN AYURVEDIC, UNANI,
SIDDHA, HOMOEOPATHIC OR
BIOCHEMIC SYSTEMS 15%"
7. THE EXTRACTS OF THE CHAPTER NOTE IN CONNECTION WITH THE RELEVANT ENTRY WHICH HAVE BEEN RELIED UPON BY THE APPELLANT ASSESSEE ARE QUOTED VERBATIM: "2. FOR THE PURPOSES OF HEADING 30.03:
(I) MEDICAMENTS MEANS GOODS (OTHER THAN FOODS OR BEVERAGES SUCH AS DIETETIC, DIABETIC OR FORTIFIED FOODS, TONIC BEVERAGES) NOT FALLING WITHIN HEADING 30.02 OR 30.04 WHICH ARE EITHER-
(A) PRODUCTS COMPRISING TWO OR MORE CONSTITUENTS WHICH HAVE BEEN MIXED OR COMPOUNDED TOGETHER FOR THERAPEUTIC OR PROPHYLACTIC USES; OR
(B) UNMIXED PRODUCTS SUITABLE FOR SUCH USES PUT UP IN MEASURED DOSES OR IN PACKINGS FOR RETAIL SALE OR FOR USE IN HOSPITALS.
* * *
5. IN RELATION TO PRODUCTS OF HEADING 30.03, CONVERSION OF POWDER INTO TABLETS OR CAPSULES, LABELLING OR RELABELLING OF CONTAINERS INTENDED FOR CONSUMERS AND REPACKING FROM BULK PACKS TO RETAIL PACKS OR THE ADOPTION OF ANY OTHER TREATMENT TO RENDER THE PRODUCT MARKETABLE TO THE CONSUMER, SHALL AMOUNT TO MANUFACTURE."
8. THE APPELLANTS RAISED SEVERAL CONTENTIONS INCLUDING THAT OF LIMITATION.
BUT THE MAINSTAY OF THE APPELLANTS ARGUMENT IS A CIRCULAR WHICH HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.