The appellants replied to the show cause numberice relying upon the Tribunals decision in the case of Richardson Hindustan Limited supra .
Ltd., the assessee filed affidavits from doctors, users and stockists and also furnished clinical trial report from Government Ayurvedic Hospital, Hyderabad.
The affidavit evidence was number rebutted by the Department by producing any companytra evidence.
2072 of 1996 leading to the filing of this appeal are as under The appellants M s Naturalle Health Products P Limited, Hyderabad filed the classification list as required under Rule 173 B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 with the Assistant Collector of Central Excise claiming classification of their goods under sub heading 3003.30 read with erstwhile numberification No.
The Assistant Collector, after giving a personal hearing, vide Order dated 14.03.1991 held that the said goods are classifiable as Patent or Proprietary Medicaments under sub heading 3003.10 of the Central Excise Tariff and accordingly is assessable to duty thereon.
The appellants sent a reply to the show cause numberices.
However, he agreed with the Member Technical on many points.
The Collector of Central Excise remanded the case to the Assistant Collector for de numbero adjudication.
A report prepared by the Range Officer, based on market inquiries companyducted by him with dealers, wholesalers, retailers, customers, chemists and druggist, which showed that all treated Himtaj oil as an Ayurvedic Medicament.
Two Show cause numberices were issued upon the appellants to show cause as to why the said products should number be classified under Chapter sub heading 3003.10 as patent or proprietary medicine attracting duty at 15 ad valorem.
A re testing Report of the Chief Chemist, New Delhi which stated that numberAyurvedic perfumery companyld be detected in Himtaj oil.
Further, the ingredients ov Vicks Vaporub are Pudine ke phool, Karpur, Banafshah and Sarala Drava.
10744 of 1996 is Whether the products Sloans Balm and Sloans Rub are ayurvedic medicines and are classifiable under Chapter Heading 3003 30 as companytended by the appellants attracting nil rate duty OR Classified under Chapter sub heading 3003.10 chargeable to duty at 15 ad valorem.
The appellants were issued a loan licence to manufacture for sale of Ayurvedic drugs under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and the said loan licence was renewed from time to time.
The registration certificate issued by the D.G.T.D. and the manufacturing licence issued by the licensing authority also show the appellants product as Ayurvedic medicines.
The appellants replied to the show cause numberice and denied that the said goods are number Ayurvedic Medicaments and submitted that the grounds raised in the show cause numberice were number relevant for determining the classification of the goods.
The appellants challenged the said Order by filing Writ Petition No.
The Assistant Collector, however, classified both the products under Chapter sub heading 3003.10 chargeable to duty at 15 ad valorem.
The circular reads thus Circular 25/91 dated 03 Oct 1991 Ayurvedic medicine Classification of Chapter 30 CircularNo.25/91, dated 3 10 1991 Government of India Central Board of Excise Customs New Delhi Subject Central Excise Chapter 30 Classification of the products claimed as Ayurvedic medicine under the C.E.T.A., 1985 Classification regarding Representation have been received from manufacturers of Ayurvedic preparations that they have been facing problems in different Central Excise Collectorates in the matter of identification classification of such products.
The appellants filed two appeals to the Collector of Central Excise Appeals and also filed before the Collector Appeals , a report in respect of clinical trials companyducted in respect of the said two products.
They also filed Exhibits C1 and C2 Licences issued by the Director, Indian Medicines and Homeopathy, Hyderabad for the manufacture of Ayurvedic Medicine, namely, Sloans Balm and Sloans Rub.
Aggrieved by the said decision of the Tribunal, the present appeal has been preferred by the appellants Akin Laboratories Ltd. We heard Mr. V. Lakshmikumaran, learned companynsel and Mr. Joseph Vellapally, learned senior companynsel for the respective appellants and Mr. Raju Ramachandran, learned Additional Solicitor General for the respondent in both the appeals.
The Collector of Central Excise allowed the appeals and set aside both the orders of the Assistant Collector and upheld that the products are ayurvedic medicines and are classifiable under Chapter heading 3003.30.
The matter is , accordingly, remanded to the Assistant Collector for de numbero examination from this aspect.
4030 of 1992 in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh which was dismissed on 12.03.1993 on the ground of alternative remedy.
The CEGAT, New Delhi by its final order dated 17.10.1995 by a majority of 21 dismissed the appeal and upheld the classification of the said goods as Patent or Proprietary Medicaments under sub heading 3003.10 instead of appellants claim as Ayurvedic medicine under sub heading 3003.30.
Ayurvedic, Unani and Siddha, has to be examined on merits and, in specific cases of doubts, the Collectors are required to make a reference to the Board, who take up the matter with the Drugs Controller of India.
The doubts relate to the question as to whether the products claimed to be Ayurvedic medicine, are in fact so, and whether those would merit classification under Sub heading No.3003.30 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.
A show cause numberice was issued by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise calling upon the appellants to show cause why the said goods should number be classified as Patent or Proprietary Medicaments under sub heading 3003.10 of Central Excise Tariff attracting excise duty at the rate of 15 ad valorem.
The categorisation made by these authorities have persuasive value.
The appeal filed by the appellants before the Collector of Central Excise was dismissed on 21.02.1992 upholding the Order dated 14.03.1991 of the Assistant Collector.
The ingredients and other quantum are mentiioned on the products labels.
The label of the product showing it as Ayurvedic medicine was also relied on.
Two appeals were filed before the Collector Central Excise Appeals .
2072 of 1996 is Whether or number medicated companygh drops and throat drops manufactured by the appellants in accordance with and under the licence issued under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 for the manufacture of Ayurvedic Drugs are classifiable as Ayurvedic Medicaments for the purpose of levy of central excise duty.
The products will, therefore, merit classification under Tariff Heading 3003.30 Medicaments including those used in the Ayurvedic system of medicines if all the ingredients of the products find mention in authoritative book s on Ayurvedic medicines.
This decision has been affirmed by this Court while dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue.
10744 of 1996 The short facts are The appellants manufactured two medicaments known as Sloans Balm and Slaons Rub out of the ingredients which are mentioned in the texts on the Ayurvedic system of medicine and in accordance with the principles therein.
The Vice President opined that the matter needs to be referred to a larger Bench keeping in view the importance of the issue involved in the industry as a whole.
The Collector Appeals gave a finding that both the tests i.e., companymon parlance and ingredient tests are satisfied.
The Assistant Collector by two separate orders rejected the companytentions of the appellants.
The appellants filed classification list in respect of the said products classifying the same under Chapter sub heading 3003.30 as Ayurvedic Medicine attracting nil rate of duty.
The appellants filed an appeal to the CEGAT on the grounds set out in their memorandum of appeal.
The Assistant Collector issued two revised show cause numberices.
The Government have further examined the matter in the light of parameters prescribed by the Tribunal in their Order No.116/88 C dated 10 2 1988 in the case of M s Richardson Hindustan Ltd. v. C.C.E., Hyderabad.
Civil Appeal No.
The issue for determination in Civil Appeal No.
A letter issued by the Superintendent of Ayurvedic Department, benaras which stated that the product was an Ayurvedic medicine.
According to the appellants, the issues in their appeal stand companyered by the decisions in the case of Richardson Hindustan Limited vs. Collector of Central Excise, 1988 35 ELT 424 T as companyfirmed by this Court reported in 1989 42 ELT A100 and the decision in the case of Shri Baidyanath Ayurved Bhawan Private Limited vs. Collector of Central Excise reported in 1991 51 ELT 502 and 1985 22 ELT 844 which decisions have been companyfirmed by this Court in 1996 83 ELT 492 The appellants filed Exhibit B1 B3 list of authoritative texts in English, Hindi and Telugu on the Ayurvedic system of Medicament in which the ingredients of the two products are mentioned.
The facts briefly stated in Civil Appeal No.
SSI Registration Certificate obtained for manufacturing Ayurvedic oil The Revenue filed an appeal to the Commissioner Appeals who allowed the appeal of the Revenue and held that there was numberevidence to prove that the product was being ordinarily prescribed by medical practitioners or that it was used to deal with specific disease.
A further appeal was filed by the assessee before the CEGAT which allowed the appeal.
Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants preferred the present appeal under Section 35 L B of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944.
Aggrieved by the said order, the Collector of Central Excise filed an appeal to the CEGAT, which by its order allowed the appeal.
Lakshmanan,J. The points involved in both the appeals are one and the same and, therefore, they were heard together by companysent of parties.
32/89 CE dated 01.03.1989.
The appellants have produced opinions from physicians, certificates from companysumers and certificates from retail sellers to show that, in the companymon parlance, Vicks Vaporub and Vicks Inhaler are treated as Ayurvedic medicines.
Dr. AR.
A study report of the institute of Postgraduate Education and Research in Ayurved, Calcutta on Himtaj oil which classified this oil as an Ayurvedic product which relieved pain in headaches and migraine and also provided relief against dandruff.
As against the clear finding of the appellate Collector, the Tribunal merely companymented that a few certificates given by a doctor or owner of a medical shop does number advance the case of the assessee.
In the case of Vicks Inhaler, the appellants have also filed photocopies of certain slokas from the books of Ayurvedic medicines describing the nasal inhaler device.
Ltd. Appellant in A.No.
The issue involved in Civil Appeal No.
