D.M. Vasavada, Member (J)

1. We heard this appeal on 3-8-1989 and passed the following order:

"Order-in-Appeal set aside with consequential relief to the appellants. This order will have no bearing in relation to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Announced in the Open Court." Hereunder, we set out our reasons for the same:

Facts stated briefly are:

The appellants manufacture Ayurvedic Maka Oil, Ayurvedic Amla Oil and Ayurvedic Brahmi Oil, hereinafter referred to as oils, since 1964 by using herbal ingredients. After the oil is manufactured, as per the process stated in Appeal Memo, a small quantity of 0.3% of sandal wood oil is added in order to preserve aroma and to prevent the oil from becoming rancid. In the year, 1971, perfumed hair oil was included in T.I.14F and that product was brought under excise net, but as the appellants were not manufacturing perfumed hair oil, even though they were made to obtain the manufacturing licence, they were paying duty under protest. But, subsequently, relying upon evidence and reports of the experts, produced by the appellants, the excise authority cancelled the licence and refunded the amount paid by way of duty.

2. Then, Superintendent o