Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: pepsu court of wards act 2008 bk Court: customs excise and service tax appellate tribunal cestat mumbai Page 1 of about 1 results (0.045 seconds)

Apr 10 2012 (TRI)

MSRTC's Central Workshop Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangaba ...

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

..... prohibited under the drugs and cosmetics act. it was held by the court (para 8) that product liabile to excise duty must be marketable on the condition in which it emerges. marketable means saleable ..... involved was dutiability of carbonless paper emerging at intermediate stage during the process of manufacture of carbon. it was observed by the honble supreme court that the product available in the market and bought and sold in the market and the assessee themselves sold the carbonless paper in the market. ..... or suitable for sale and goods need not be marketed. it was also observed by the court (para 29) that market of pharmaceutical company is enhanced substantially by distribution of free samples. in other words, the distribution of such physician ..... this case is distinguishable. 13. in the case of medley pharmaceuticals ltd. vs. cce, daman (supra), the issue before the honble supreme court was valuation of physician samples distributed as free samples. it was pleaded by the assessee that physician samples are not excisable goods when sale thereof is ..... excise duty in respect of aurangabad unit. he also relied upon the following decisions in support of his contention:- a) ford india private ltd. vs. cc, chennai 2008 (228) elt 71 (tri.-chennai); b) bharat sanchar nigam ltd. vs. uoi 2006 (2) str 161 (sc); c) a.b. mauri india pvt. .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //