SURYA PHARMACEUTICAL LTD. Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question referred for consideration by the Larger Bench is as follows:

(2.) UNDER Notification 6/94 -CE dated 1.3.1994, the Central Government granted partial exemption from duty to certain goods specified in column (3) of the Table annexed to the notification. S. No. 6 in the Table was "bulk drugs other than bulk drugs specified under First Schedule to Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 1987 as amended from time to time" coming under chapters 28 and 29 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. Explanation given at the end of the notification provided that "for the purpose of this notification, the expression "bulk drugs" shall have the same meaning assigned to it in the Drugs (Price Control) Order, 1987 and shall include their salts, esters or derivatives, if any". Appellants were entitled to the benefit of the above notification and the duty payable on the bulk drugs manufactured by them was 10% adv. There is no dispute that they are entitled to such concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 6/94. The above notification was amended by Notification No. 7/95 -CE dated 9.2.1995 whereby Sr. No. 6 and the entries relating thereto in the Table annexed to the Notification 6/94 -CE were omitted along with the Explanation to that notification. On the same date, Notification No. 8/95 -CE was issued. Under the above notification certain goods falling within chapter 28, 29 and 30 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 were granted exemption from duty. Sl. No. 1 took in 21 items of 'bulk drugs'. Nil rate of duty is specified for the above item. Sl. No. 4 is bulk drugs other than those specified at Sl. No. 1 referred to above. Duty for this item was @ 10%. Explanation (i) provided as follows:

(3.) THE question that arises for consideration has been subject matter of decision of the Tribunal on earlier occasion when two benches have taken conflicting views. In Karnataka Chemsyn Ltd. v. CCE, Bangalore, 2001 (44) RLT 407, South Regional Bench, Bangalore of this Tribunal took a view in favour of the assessee, whereas Delhi Bench in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. CCE, Chandigarh, 1999 (35) RLT 575 took a view in favour of the Revenue. This has resulted reference to a Large Bench.