TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1075X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - CESTAT NEW DELHI], where it was held that On the basis of the certificates of various experts certifying that the scalp vein infusion sets, in question, are Cannula which can be used for blood vessels, the Tribunal held that the same would be eligible for exemption - the appellants are eligible for exemption for i. v. cannula manufactured by them - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/536/2010-EX(DB), E/537/2010-EX(DB) - A/71852-71853/2017-EX[DB] - Dated:- 10-7-2017 - Shri Anil Choudhary, Member ( Judicial ) And Shri Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member ( Technical ) For the Appellant: Shri Anil Singh Sisodia ( Advocate ) For the Respondent: Shri Pawan Kumar Singh ( Superintendent ) A.R. ORDER Per : Anil Chou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... LT A74(SC). Once again the issue was decided by the Hon ble Tribunal in the matter of Medisphere [2001(131) ELT 608] and the SLP filed by the department against the said decision was also dismissed. The benefit of exemption from Central Excise Duty was extended subsequently from 01.03.2003 for the goods falling under the same description by reference to the Customs Notification, which already provided the exemption from payment of BCD. In view of the above position, the appellant was availing the exemption on the subject goods. The CBEC had issued a Circular No.847/05/2007-CX wherein it was clarified that the subject goods are not covered by the description Disposable and non-disposable cannula for aorta, vena cavae and similar veins ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere exemption is by specifying the description of the goods. The case of Revenue was based on an opinion obtained from Central Government Health Service (CGHS for short) Department and thereafter show cause notices were issued raising demand for the subject goods on the assessees. Under similar facts and circumstances this Tribunal have allowed the appeal in the case of Becton Dickinson India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, Delhi - 2015 326) ELT 712 and Eastern Medikit Ltd Versus CCE, Delhi - III - 2015 TIOL 2223 CESTAT-Del. The decisions in the case of Becton Dickinson and Eastern Medikit have followed the earlier decision in the case of Sabharwal Surgical Pvt. Ltd. (supra). It is further contended that in any case the matter being wholly int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10. We find that the denial of exemption to IVC manufactured by the appellants is solely based on the DGHS opinion. While DGHS elaborately discussed the difference between the aorta and vena cavae on one side and peripheral vessels at the other side, there is no clarity from the records as to what is the scope of the term that blood vessels . The IVC manufactured by the appellants are used as Cannula is not disputed. The department 's contention is that the Cannula is not eligible for exemption as per the terms of the above entry. It is common knowledge that the circulator system of the body consisted of arteries, veins and capillaries. It is also not disputed that there are different types of arteries and veins and aorta and vena cava ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
