9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 1008X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d been dismissed holding that the Intravenous fluid formulations viz. 20% and 10% Mannitol I.P., Metronidazole, Ciprofloxacin Lactate, 10% Icodex, Icolyte F, GM, P & R in 5% Dext Inj., Isodex 5%, 5% Invert Sugar, Icoccel, Icoamin 10% and Isodex M&P are not eligible for Notification No. 3/2001, dated 1-3-2001 and No. 6/2002-C.E., dated 1-3-2002 which exempted from duty the intravenous fluids used for replenishment of sugar, electrolyte or other fluids. The Tribunal had upheld the denial of exemption on the ground that these intravenous fluids are mixed with medicines/antibiotics and not merely for sugar, electrolyte or fluid replenishment. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. Shri Ashutosh Upadhyay, ld. Counsel for the appellant, pleaded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the appeal memo, there are no order of the Tribunal on this point in the impugned order. Shri Upadhyay, ld. Counsel, therefore, pleaded that the above mistakes in the order need to be rectified and, therefore, prayed for allowing the miscellaneous application filed by the appellant. 4. The Department Representative, Shri R.K. Verma, opposed the appellant's plea for rectification pleading that there are no mistakes apparent from the record in the impugned order and the application for rectification of mistake is worded more like an appeal raising the very issues which had been decided by the Tribunal in the final order. He, therefore, pleaded that there is no merit in this application filed by the appellant. 5. We have consid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tibiotic or any other component having therapeutic value and are only for replenishment of sugar, electrolyte or the fluids, the claim for exemption has to be made by the appellant before the jurisdictional excise authorities and as such there is no need for rectification of this order. 6. As regards the appellant's plea that there are no directions on the appellant's plea with regard to availability of Cenvat credit in respect of inputs if the final products are held as chargeable to duty, there was no necessity for the Tribunal to give such a direction, as availability of Cenvat credit depends upon the production of documents by the appellant in support of this claim for which the matter has to be taken up by the appellant with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
