2005 (12) TMI 372 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Exemption eligibility of infusion sets, scalp vein sets, and BT sets under Notification No. 339/86.

Analysis:
The appeal challenged the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the eligibility of infusion sets, scalp vein sets, and BT sets for exemption under Notification No. 339/86. The appellant argued that the Commissioner erred in overturning the adjudication order of the Assistant Commissioner, which considered expert opinion and case law. It was contended that the Commissioner wrongly categorized disposable surgical items as not meant for long-term use.

The dispute revolved around the interpretation of "intravenous canulae and tubing for long term use" under Serial No. 23 of exemption Notification No. 339/80. Previous judgments, including a case before the Tribunal and the Madras High Court, had established that scalp vein sets could qualify as "intravenous canulae and tubing for long term use." The Madras High Court clarified that long term use refers to the needle's capability to remain in the vein for an extended period, not necessarily repeated use.

The Assistant Commissioner's order highlighted that the sets in question consisted of a needle and a tube, indicating they could be considered intravenous canulae. The Commissioner (Appeals) failed to examine the samples and wrongly concluded that the sets were only needles, not canulae. The Assistant Commissioner also noted that the items were designed for long-term use as they could deliver fluids continuously for hours or days. The one-time use restriction aimed to maintain hygiene and prevent disease spread between patients, not contradicting long-term use. Additionally, similar assessees had been granted exemption benefits, supporting the appellant's case.

Considering the above points, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision. The operative part of the order was pronounced on 14-12-2005.