https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344143 I.V. cannula were treated as falling within the exemption for disposable and non-disposable cannula for aorta, vena cavae, similar veins and blood vessels, because the expression "blood vessels" was read independently and not confined by the earlier words in the entry. The Tribunal followed its prior rulings on the same exemption language and noted that the Revenue's challenge had earlier failed before the Supreme Court. On that interpretation, denial of exemption based only on departmental opinion was not sustainable, and the exemption applied to the cannula manufactured by the appellants. en-us Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Jun 2017 05:37:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344143 I.V. cannula were treated as falling within the exemption for disposable and non-disposable cannula for aorta, vena cavae, similar veins and blood vessels, because the expression "blood vessels" was read independently and not confined by the earlier words in the entry. The Tribunal followed its prior rulings on the same exemption language and noted that the Revenue's challenge had earlier failed before the Supreme Court. On that interpretation, denial of exemption based only on departmental opinion was not sustainable, and the exemption applied to the cannula manufactured by the appellants. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344143