https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52924 Intravenous infusion fluids containing added medicaments were treated as continuing to qualify for exemption where their essential character remained that of IV fluids administered through the intravenous route. The analysis rejected reading words such as "only" or "exclusively" into the notification, and noted that limited medicaments did not by themselves remove the product from the exemption. On limitation, the absence of suppression or mala fides meant the extended period could not be invoked under the excise limitation provision; the associated penalty and interest therefore did not survive. The result was that the duty demand on merits, as well as limitation-based consequences, failed. en-us Fri, 27 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Oct 2010 15:16:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52924 Intravenous infusion fluids containing added medicaments were treated as continuing to qualify for exemption where their essential character remained that of IV fluids administered through the intravenous route. The analysis rejected reading words such as "only" or "exclusively" into the notification, and noted that limited medicaments did not by themselves remove the product from the exemption. On limitation, the absence of suppression or mala fides meant the extended period could not be invoked under the excise limitation provision; the associated penalty and interest therefore did not survive. The result was that the duty demand on merits, as well as limitation-based consequences, failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 27 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52924