Per M.V. Ravindran : These appeals No. E/3788 to 3790/02 are of M/S. Daga Ayurvedic and Cosmetic Pvt. Ltd. All these appeals are directed against the order No. 21/MP/2002 dt. 22.05.2002, which confirmed the demand and also imposed penalties on the appellants.

2. The relevant facts arise for consideration are the appellants are small scale industry and are manufacturers of oil under the brand name of "Daga Ghritkumari Oil'', "Daga Chandan Oil". The officers of the Preventive Section visited the premises of the appellants and found that the appellants were manufacturing these oils but declaring them as ayurvedic medicine and were also, during the part of the period, manufacturing the products under the brand name, which is not their own. The officers retrieved the records from the premises of the appellant and seized the goods from the factory premises and recorded statements of various persons. Show cause notice was issued to the appellants directing them to show cause as to why the classification of the product manufactured by them should not be considered under chapter heading 3305 instead of 3003.20 as claimed by the appellants and why the duty for the extended period should not be demanded from them and penalty be not imposed on them. The appellants contested the show cause notice on the ground that the products, which are manufactured by them, are not hair oil and are ayurvedic medicines manufactured under the drug licence given by the FDA, Gujarat and they have produced affidavits of ayurvedic doctors to indicate that their product is not hair oil, but ayurvedic medicine. The Adjudicating Authority did not accept the contentions of the appellants and confirmed the demand, confiscated the stocks lying in the factory with an option to redeem the same on payment of fine and also imposed penalties on the appellant company as well as on the directors of the company. Hence, these appeals.

3. The Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant takes us through the show cause notice and the replies filed by them. He specifically pointed out the fact that the cartons of the product manufactured by them were enclosed by them along with the appeal and he points out that they had very clearly mentioned in the carton that these two products are ayurvedic medicines and not a cosmetic or toiletry products. It is his submission that the ingredients which are used in the manufacturing of the ayurvedic oil were mentioned in the ayurvedic textbooks. But the formula used by them is of own. It is his submission that the Adjudicating Authority has arrived at the conclusion that it is a hair oil because the basic ingredient which is used in the product is "sesame oil/Til Oil". He submits that all the ingredients are put in to the sesame oil and boiled together to arrive at the final product. He also brings to our notice affidavits-cum-certificate given by the ayurvedic doctors from different regions. He also indicates that the carton of the product would clearly show that the oil is used for prevention of hair loss, effective ailment of scalp, relief from head-ache, restorative tonic for hair, excellent oil to treat multiple maladies and cool and massage the body in order to rejuvenate the skin and strengthen the body. He further submits that the demand of the duty is for the period 1995-96 to 1999-2000. It is his submission that the appellants have been filing the declaration as small scale industry with the authorities from 1994 and they have indicated the manufacturing of these two products in their declaration. It is his submission that the show cause notice was issued to appellant in 2000, which itself is beyond the period of limitation, as department was aware of the fact that the appellant is manufacturing these products. He relies heavily on the judgements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta Vs. M/s. Sharma Chemical Works, 2003 (56) RLT 123 (SC)=2003 (154) E.L.T. 328 and M/s. Dabur (