Case Law Details
Fourrts (India) Laboratories P. Ltd Vs Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (CESTAT Chennai)
Introduction: In a significant judgment, the CESTAT Chennai weighed in on the debate over the appropriate assessment of physician samples, rendering its decision in favor of Fourrts (India) Laboratories P. Ltd. This article provides an in-depth analysis of the ruling and its implications.
Background and Contention: Upon examination of Fourrts India’s records, discrepancies were noted in their product clearances. For sales, they used valuation under Section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. However, for physician samples, they adopted the transaction value as per Section 4. The department believed that physician samples should also be evaluated under Section 4A. Consequently, a Show Cause Notice was issued for the differential duty, interest, and penalties. Both the original authority and Commissioner (Appeals) sided with the department, which led to this appeal.
Arguments Presented:
1. Appellant’s Standpoint: Ms. Manne Veera Niveditha, the advocate for Fourrts India, referenced previous judgments from the Hon’ble Apex Court, highlighting that Sections 4 and 4A are distinct and driven by separate legal principles. She emphasized the inapplicability of Rule 4 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules 2000 to Section 4A, arguing that the basis for demand was fundamentally flawed.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
