Excise – Cestat Ahmedabad: Supply of medicaments to Government Institutions wherein, on the package it is mentioned ‘NOT FOR SALE’ and no retail price printed, is not liable to be governed by Valuation Provision of Section 4A, therefore, the impugned order is not sustainable – Appeal allowed [Order attached]

Your free trial / membership plan is expired.
Kindly subscribe to get complete access to indirect tax updates and issue wise cases
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates and download copy of case laws/ notification/ circular etc.
Be a part of our WhatsApp group and read real time indirect tax updates
Access to ready case laws of General Issues and Industry Wide Issues under GST
Access to relevant provisions of law / circular in respect to the issues, along with trail of their amendments
Write your GST query to us for evaluation
Subscription Charges:*
Indirect tax updates -
6 months @299 / 1 Year @499 only
Indirect tax updates + Issue wise cases -
6 months @1199 / 1 Year @1999 only
*Plus applicable GST
Admin
30-Nov-2022 10:15:31
Order date – 28 November 2022
Facts –
- The appellant, J B Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd and Parmeshwar B Bang, are engaged with supply of medicaments to institutions such as BHEL, Railways and other government hospitals and on the package of the goods it is stated as ‘NOT FOR SALE’ and no MRP was printed.
- The Appellant submits that on the identical facts and the issue involved, this tribunal has passed various decisions wherein, it was held that when supply was made to institutions such as railways, government hospitals, etc. and on the package it is mentioned as ‘NOT FOR SALE’ and retail price was not printed, the valuation of the goods shall be governed by Section 4 and not Section 4A.
Issue –
- Whether the supply of medicaments to Government Institutions such as BHEL, Railway, Government Hospitals, etc. wherein, on the package it is mentioned ‘NOT FOR SALE’ and no retail price was printed is liable to be governed by Valuation Provision of Section 4 or Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944?
Order –
- The Tribunal relied on the decision of this tribunal in the case of MEDLEY PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. vide Final Order dated 26.10.2022, after considering the decision in USV Ltd. & Zydus Healthcare Ltd. wherein it held that the medicaments are not sold in retail, therefore, retail sale price need not to be affixed. It is the submission of the appellant that they have not affixed retail sale price on such medicament and it is also mentioned on the package of the Medicament that “it is not for a retail sale” and it is for use by Government Hospitals and Some Institutional Buyers.
- Thus the medicaments are not sold in retail and the retail sale price needs not to be affixed. Consequently, the valuation of the said goods cannot be insisted upon under Section 4A of Central Excise Act, 1944.
- From the above decision of this Tribunal along with various decision cited by the appellant, it is clear that the issue is no longer res-integra and in the appellant’s case value of goods is clearly governed by Section 4 of Central Excise Act and not under Section 4A therefore, the impugned order is not sustainable hence the same is set aside.
- The appeals are allowed.
Related Post
Post Category
Your free trial/ membership plan has expired. Kindly subscribe to get complete access of tax news updates.
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates
Access to the Order Copy of the case law/ Notification/ Circular etc
Be a part of our Whatsapp group and read real time tax updates
Access to ready case laws/ circulars on general and industry-wide issues under GST
Submit your GST issues to us for evaluation