http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1  

CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  D33361 of 2007

PETITIONER: COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE-I

RESPONDENT: BAHAR AGROCHEM & FEED (P)LTD.

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/02/2008

BENCH: S.H. KAPADIA & B. SUDERSHAN REDDY

JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT O R D E R        

                Delay condoned. Appeal admitted.                 Mr. Ajay Aggarwal, learned counsel, accepts notice for the respondent.

       The short question which arises in the present case is: Whether ‘Vipul  Booster’ is an \023insecticide\024  or whether it is a \023plant growth regularor\024?

       We have gone through the judgment of the Tribunal.  It has been pointed  out on behalf of the Department, rightly, that the assessee has registered  the above-mentioned product as \023insecticide\024 with the Directorate of Plant  Protection, Ministry of Agriculture, Faridabad and that they have been  regularly following all procedures and formalities stipulated under the  Insecticide Act, 1968. This aspect has not at all been considered by the  Tribunal. The Tribunal has also failed to consider the effect of the  

-2-

issuance of such a certificate under the Insecticide Act, 1968.  It is argued  on behalf of the assessee that one of the ingredients of the above product  is insecticide and the certificate issued under the Insecticide Act is only  with reference to that ingredient only. All these questions will require  fresh consideration in accordance with law by the Tribunal.

       Accordingly, the impugned judgment is set aside and the matter is  remitted to the Tribunal for fresh consideration in accordance with law.

       Appeal is disposed of.