It is that order of the CEGAT that is assailed in this appeal We heard the learned companynsel for the parties.
The requirement which was insisted upon by the authorities and companyfirmed by the Tribunal, was a impossibility.
The Superintendent, Central Excise companyrected the classification as falling under heading 2913.00 and pointed out that the bulk drugs were exempted.
Rejecting the claim of the appellant for exemption under numberification number 234, dated 3.4.1986, the Assistant Collector companyfirmed that it was liable to pay duty at the rate of 15.
On appeal, the Commissioner Appeal upheld the order of the Assistant Collector.
2002 Supp 2 SCR 87 The following Order of the Court was delivered The challenge in this appeal is to the companyrectness of the order of the Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in Appeal No.
Consequently, the appellant became entitled to the benefit of Notification No.
With effect from 1.3.1986, the new classification was given effect to under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 for short the Act On March 3, 1986, under the Act the appellant filed classification lists categorizing the bulk drugs under the new tariff heading 30, having nil rate of duty.
To companyply with the requirement of the said numberification, the appellant applied for a certificate to the Drugs Controller of the Government of India.
234 dated 3.4.1986 would relate back to March 1, 1986.
At that time, the rate of duty payable under heading 2913.00 was 15 and that was what the appellant had shown when it refiled the classification list.
The appellant submitted the said certificate to the companycerned authorities.
On further appeal, on April 26, 1993, the CEGAT companyfirmed the order of the Commissioner Appeals on the ground that the appellant did number claim the benefit of exemption at the time of filing the classification list so as to enable the Assistant Collector to fix a period for production of certificate from the Drugs Controller of the Government of India to the effect that the drugs claimed for exemption were bulk drugs within the meaning of the explanation to the numberification.
However, the appellant subsequently claimed the benefit of the said numberification number234/ 86 dated 3.4.1986.
The said certificate was issued on 24.6.1986.
On the ground that the appellant was number eligible for exemption and the duty payable at the rate of 15 was number paid, the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, issued three show cause numberices on 24.7.1986, 6.11.1986 and 6.1.1987 which relate to the periods 1.3.1986 to 2.4.1986, 11.4.1986 to 27.7.86 and 28.7.1986 to 20.11,1986 respectively.
234/86 from March 1, 1986.
The drugs manufactured by it were classified under tariff item 68 of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff and they were exempt under Notification No.234/82 dated 1.1.1982.
It has been numbered above that the bulk drugs manufactured by the appellant fell under tariff item 68 of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff and the appellant was enjoying exemption under Notification No.234/82.
234/86 was issued by the Central Government granting exemption to bulk drugs classified under Chapters 28 and 29.
E/717/88 C. dated 26th April, 1993.
