Writ Petition No. 13584 of 2010. Case: Parenteral Drugs (India) Ltd. Vs Union of India. High Court of Madhya Pradesh (India)

Case NumberWrit Petition No. 13584 of 2010
CounselFor Appellent: Shri L. N. Soni, Learned Sr. Advocate with J. Lopez, Counsel and For Respondents: Shri Vinay Zelawat, Learned Counsel
JudgesKrishn Kumar Lahoti and Shantanu Kemkar, JJ.
IssueCentral Excise Act, 1944 - Section 11A
Citation2013 (289) ELT 296 (MP)
Judgement DateNovember 27, 2012
CourtHigh Court of Madhya Pradesh (India)

Order:

  1. Petitioner has sought following reliefs:-

    1. Issue writ of Declaration or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226-227 of the Constitution of India, against the office of the Respondent No.2 Commissioner of the Central Excise quashing the impugned show cause notices issued for the period between December 2003 to 31st March, 2009, i.e. the period when the order of the Hon''ble Customs Excise, Service Tax Appellate Tribunal was operative.

    2. Issue such other or further appropriate order, writ or directions as this Hon''ble Court may think appropriate in the interest of justice.

  2. The case of the petitioner is very short one. Petitioner is a manufacturer of Intravenous Fluids and the question involved in this case is whether such item is exempted from payment of excise duty or not. The contention of the petitioner is that vide notification dated 1-3-2001 bearing No. 3/2001, petitioner is exempted from payment of excise duty. The department is contesting the matter. The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai had decided the matter in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 27-2-2004 and held that the product manufactured by the petitioner was an exempted product covered under Notification No. 3/2001. The order passed by the Tribunal was subject matter of Civil Appeal Nos. 4944/2004, 6519/2005, 1152/2006, 2127/2006, 2628/2006, 2630/2006 and 4059/2006 before the Apex Court. The Apex Court vide order dated 31-3-2009 [2009 (236) ELT 625 (SC)] decided the appeals, which reads thus:-

    "Delay condoned.

    In this batch of Civil Appeals, the main issue which arose for determination before the Adjudicating Authority was whether Intravenous Fluids having a therapeutic value stood covered under Exemption Notification No. 3/2001.

    In the lead matter - M/s. Parenteral Drugs (I) Ltd. - the respondents were engaged in the manufacture of various types of Intravenous Fluids. They were availing the benefits of Notification No. 6/2000, dated 1-3-2000. The said Notification was amended by Notification No. 36/2000, dated 4-5-2000, whereby Entry No. 47-A was added thereby exempting "Intravenous Fluids" from payment of excise duty. However, from 1-3-2001, the earlier notifications were replaced by Notification No. 3/2001 which defined "Intravenous Fluids" as those which are used for sugar, electrolyte or fluid replenishment. In other words, open-ended exemption stood restricted by the above three qualifications.

    ...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT