Serene Labs Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Serene Labs vs Commissioner of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jun 28, 2005

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/39507

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/39507
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: J Balasundaram, Vice-, A M Moheb
Decided On: Jun 28, 2005
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Excise

Key legal issue: Excise

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Serene Labs

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise

Legal References

Reported In: (2005)(188)ELT290Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. the issue for determination in these appeals is correct classification of medicaments such as ampicilin injection bp and gentamicin injection bp - whether under cet subheading 3003.20 as generic medicaments as contended by the revenue and held by the lower appellate authority, or under cet sub-heading 3003.10 as p or p medicaments which is the claim of the assessees.3. we find that it is not necessary to give a finding on this issue for the purpose of disposal of these appeals. this is for the reason that undisputedly the assessees paid duty on the goods in question and then cleared them either for export or otherwise. therefore, they had rightly availed modvat credit of the duty paid by them on the inputs and also taken rebate when the goods were exported. the entire exercise was revenue neutral. therefore, without going into the correct classification of the products in dispute, we hold that the appeals are required to succeed.

Full Judgment

1. The issue for determination in these appeals is correct classification of medicaments such as Ampicilin Injection BP and Gentamicin Injection BP - whether under CET subheading 3003.20 as generic medicaments as contended by the Revenue and held by the lower appellate authority, or under CET sub-heading 3003.10 as P or P medicaments which is the claim of the assessees.

3. We find that it is not necessary to give a finding on this issue for the purpose of disposal of these appeals. This is for the reason that undisputedly the assessees paid duty on the goods in question and then cleared them either for export or otherwise. Therefore, they had rightly availed Modvat credit of the duty paid by them on the inputs and also taken rebate when the goods were exported. The entire exercise was Revenue neutral. Therefore, without going into the correct classification of the products in dispute, we hold that the appeals are required to succeed.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Serene Labs vs Commissioner of Central Excise Same Subject Excise Same Judge J Balasundaram, Vice-, A M Moheb