TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 536
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed by the Revenue assailing order dated 13.10.2008 passed by the Customs Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as the 'CESTAT', for the sake of convenience). By the said order, the CESTAT has observed 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ar as the subject products are concerned, it was stated as "Intravenous Fluids, which are used for sugar, electrolyte or fluid replenishment". Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the object of issuing the Notification dated 01.03.2001 insofar as intravenous fluids are concerned, was in order to specifically indicate as to for which intravenous fluids, as such, the exemption was available. In other words, the contention was that if an intravenous fluid is used for sugar, electrolyte or fluid replenishment per se and composition of the said product being such that it is used only for the purpose of replenishment and not for any other purpose, then the benefit of exemption would be allowed. In this context, it was contended that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... product and also as to whether the same was a Schedule `H' drug or not. In that regard, it was urged that since there is no detailed discussion in the impugned order, the matter may be remanded to CESTAT for giving a finding on the particular issue which arises in these appeals. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent drew our attention to the specific words used in the Notification dated 01.03.2001 in the context of the composition of the product in question to contend that the product in question, namely, Calcium Borogluconate and Calcium Magnesium Borogluconate are essentially composed of sugar and electrolytes which are meant for fluid replenishment. In that regard, our attention was drawn to Annexure A-11, which is a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and there was an attempt to escape the payment of excise duty under the shelter of the exemption notification. It was also contended that ultimately the composition of the product in question was nothing but what is in an intravenous fluid in the sense that it consists of amino acids, sugar and electrolytes and is purely for the purpose of fluid replenishment and not a medicine for treatment of any disease as such. It was submitted that merely because the intravenous fluid is given during the course of treatment of certain diseases, it would not make it a medicinal product. That such a product can be used both as a preventive measure and also during the course of treatment of certain diseases in order to preserve the electrolytes and fluid....