Case Law Details
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs Denis Chem Lab Ltd. & Anr. (Supreme Court of India)
Supreme Court held that exemption from excise duty given to intravenous fluids is available to products manufactured for treatment of veterinary disease if products falls under the category of intravenous fluids.
Facts- The present appeals are filed by the Revenue passed by CESTAT. Notably, CESTAT held that the exemption granted earlier by Notification dated 01.03.2000 (Notification No.6/2000) and the subsequent Notification dated 01.03.2001 (Notification No.3/2001), in the context of exemption from payment of excise duty given to intravenous fluids and later on stated as intravenous fluids, which are used for sugar, electrolyte or fluid replenishment, was in the nature of a clarification and the same could not receive a restricted meaning or interpretation while considering the said exemption, vis-a-vis the Notification dated 01.03.2001. Secondly, the Tribunal has stated that insofar as Chennai circle was concerned, the benefit of exemption was given and there was no further indication that the stand was revised thereafter.
Taking into consideration the letter of the Deputy Drug Controller dated 09.02.2004, wherein it was specifically stated that Calcium Borogluconate and Calcium Magnesium Borogluconate are considered as sources of electrolyte and these were part of intravenous fluids, which were essential products for which exemption was provided under the said two Notifications, the CESTAT held that the respondents/Assessees were eligible for exemption, as claimed and therefore the consequential reliefs and the benefits under the said notifications were granted. As already noted, being aggrieved by the said order, the Revenue has preferred these appeals.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
