1 cexa32-04 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.32 OF 2004 Union of India ..Appellant. V/s. M/s. Neon Labs Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly with J.B. Mishra for appellant. None for respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND R.M. SAVANT, JJ. DATED : 16TH DECEMBER, 2010 P.C. :- 1. This appeal was admitted on 18/08/2005 on the following questions of law:- (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was entitled to avail Modvat credit on syringes and needles ? (2) Whether the demand confirmed by the Commissioner by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide his O-in-A No.YPP/174/M.III/98 dated 28-3-1998 is justified ? 2. The dispute in the present case is, whether the assessee is entitled to input duty credit in respect of syringes and needles supplied along with medicaments (injections). The credit was denied on the 2 cexa32-04 ground that syringes and needles are packing materials and not inputs used in the manufacture of medicaments. The Tribunal following its decision in the case of Jaggsonpal Pharmaceuticals Ltd. V/s. CCE, New Delhi reported in 1997 (92) E.L.T. 414 (Tribunal) and Heal Well Pharmaceuticals V/s. CCE, Bombay reported in 1994(72) E.L.T. 446 (Tribunal) has allowed the claim of the respondent-assessee. The Tribunal has recorded a finding of fact that the assessee is not claiming syringes and needles to be packing materials and that syringes and needles as well as injections are sold as a set and that value of the set includes the value of the syringes and needles on which duty is paid. This Court in the case of Commissioner of C. Ex., Mumbai-IV V/s. Okasa Ltd. reported in 2009 (241) E.L.T. 359 (Bom.) has in similar circumstances held that credit of duty paid on plastic dropper supplied with pediatric drops would be allowable. In the light of the aforesaid judgment, in our opinion, no fault can be found with the order of the CESTAT. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed off by answering the first question in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue and the second question is answered in the negative i.e in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. 3. The appeal is disposed off accordingly with no order as to costs. (R.M. SAVANT, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)