TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1996 (7) TMI 372
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., Member (T) (Oral)]. - The issue in the appeal relates to eligibility of exemption Notification Nos. 29/88, 30/88 and 141/89 in respect of medicine described as Coxina-3 which is a formulation of rifampicin and isoniazid and it also has a drug pyrazinamide. The learned lower authority has held as under :- "It is not disputed that Coxina-3 is a formulation of Rifampicin with Isoniazid, which al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....yrazinamide, rifampicin and isoniazid. When a formulation contains the bulk drugs which are prescribed for exemption under a notification, it has to be held that it is a formulation of those bulk drugs entitled to exemption under that notification . The lower authority has not obtained any expert opinion that Coxina-3 is not a formulation of the bulk drugs mentioned above. Therefore, the claim of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Schedule I. He pleaded that Rifampicin does not figure under Schedule I. Therefore, this benefit of notification would not be available. Likewise, Notification No. 30/88 covers formulations of pyrazinamide. Medicine in question cannot be considered as a formulation of pyrazinamide but a formulation of three bulk drugs and therefore this notification will also not apply. In regard to Notification ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fit of notification is not acceptable. The learned lower authority has observed that no expert opinion was obtained and he himself without obtaining the expert opinion has gone on to allow the appeal of the respondents. If the lower authority felt that the expert opinion was required to be taken he should have taken steps to call in an expert or taken the opinion of the Drugs Controller and not ha....