9911796707
| TMI General Search |
|
Advanced Search Options
Showing 101 to 120 of 864 Records Search Text: custom duty exemption notification medical equipments |
| Search Results |
| Acts / Rules (24) Articles (14) Case-Laws (575) Circulars (69) Forum (4) Short Notes (7) Highlights (5) Manuals (3) News (39) Notifications (123) Schedules (1) |
|
Exemption to components of the medical equipments covered by 65/88 above Notification No. 66/88-Cus, dated March 1, 1988, issued by the Central Government under the Customs Act, 1962, grants exemptions for component parts of medical equipment specified in Notification No. 65/88-Cus. When these components are imported into India for manufacturing the specified goods, they are exempt from customs duty exceeding 40% ad valorem under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, and from the entire additional duty under section 3 of the same Act. This exemption is deemed necessary in the public interest.
2009 (1) TMI 369 - CESTAT, MUMBAI Import of medical equipment by claiming exemption under Notification No. 64/88-Cus. – appellant have not submitted the certificate required under Notification No. 64/88 from the Ministry of Health and Welfare certifying them to be a charitable institution and therefore the benefit under Notification No. 64/88-Cus. cannot be extended - They have alternatively also claimed exemption under Notification No. 70/81 - benefit of Notification No. 70/81 cannot be extended to them due to non-furnishing of... ... ...
2007 (12) TMI 85 - CESTAT, BANGALORE Assessee, hospital cleared certain equipments like computerized gas electrolyte analyzer system claiming benefit of exemption from Customs duty u/not. 64/88 – non-compliance of condition – free treatment to on an average 40% patient - . “On an average”, needn’t be on daily or monthly basis but at least on a yearly basis, they should show that they had treated 40% of the outpatients free – condition not fulfilled - Demand sustainable but penalty reduced... ... ...
2018 (10) TMI 1791 - CESTAT KOLKATA Import of Spinal Needle - duty free import or not - Benefit of exemption under List 41 under Serial No. 370 N/No. 21/2002 and 6/2006-C.E., Serial No. 68 - Medical equipment (excluding Foley Balloon Catheters) and other goods, specified in List 37 - Accessories of the medical equipment - HELD THAT:- This issue is no longer res integra in view of the judgement in the case of Becton Dickinson India Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C.Ex. Customs, Delhi III [ 2015 (6) TMI 335 - CESTAT NEW DELHI ] where the Tribunal ha... ... ...
2018 (8) TMI 1347 - CESTAT MUMBAI Import of medical equipments duty free - benefit of N/N. 64/88 dated 01.03.1988 - end use exemption - Subsequently since the Appellant did not fulfill the conditions as prescribed by the notification, the said Certificate issued by DGHS was cancelled and withdrawn - Demand under section 125(2) of the Customs Act, 1962. Held that:- It is an admitted fact that for non fulfillment of the conditions of exemption notification No 64/88-Cus, DGHS has withdrawn the certificate issued by them for claimin... ... ...
2010 (10) TMI 649 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI Demand - whether Intravenous Fluids having a therapeutic value stood covered under Exemption Notification No. 3/2001 - burden is on the assessee to prove that the item falls within the four corners of the exemption notification - with effect from 1-3-2001 the exemption benefit, which is available to the Intravenous Fluid for sugar, electrolyte and fluid replenishment, does not extend to the Intravenous Fluid comprising of medicines and drugs like, anti-bacterial, anti-biotic and anti-microbial, ... ... ...
2006 (11) TMI 78 - CESTAT,BANGALORE Medical Eqipment – Alleged that appellant is not entitle for the benefit of Notification No. 64/88-Cus and accordingly demandfor duty and penalty – After considering all the factor authority find the allegation right... ... ...
2001 (8) TMI 1443 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT The court clarified the definition of "charitable hospital and dispensary" under Section 110(e) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, emphasizing the provision of free or subsidized treatment to the poor and deserving. It outlined conditions for qualification and rejected the notion that services must be entirely free. Regarding the validity of the impugned order and notice on property tax exemption, the court found procedural flaws and lack of proper consideration, quashing the order and directing a fresh decision by the Appellate Authority within four months. The petitioners were permitted to submit additional evidence, and coercive recovery measures were stayed pending reconsideration.
2023 (9) TMI 464 - CESTAT CHENNAI Demand of interest on differential duty - One Set of True Beam Linear Accelerator - Disputre were related to classification under CTH 90229030 or under 90221490? - wrongful availment of exemption under Customs Notification Nos. 021/2012 Sl.No. 473 and 021/2012 Sl.No. 95 - HELD THAT:- There is no contravention of provisions of Section 111 (m) of the Customs Act, 1962 as the assessee has declared all the details and the value of the imported goods in the Bill of Entry filed. As such, the confiscat... ... ...
2022 (8) TMI 343 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT Liability of interest in terms of Section 28AB and Notification No.47/1996-CUS (NT) dated 9th October 1996 - import of medical equipments - non compliance with the conditions attached in Notification No.64/88-CUS dated 1st March 1988 - prospective effect of section 28AB - wilful suppression of facts or not - HELD THAT:- In the case of DIWAN CHAND SATYA PAL AGGL. IMAGING RESEARCH CENTRE VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [ 2016 (3) TMI 989 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] where the facts were similar, the Delh... ... ...
2005 (6) TMI 195 - CESTAT, BANGALORE The Appellate Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, allowing the appeals based on the interpretation of Notification No. 16/2000-Cus. The presence of the A-scan facility in the manufactured Ultrasound scanners entitled the imported 'Medical Probes' to the benefit of the notification. The decision considered various arguments, judicial precedents, and circulars, ultimately granting relief to the appellants and overturning the denial of exemption benefits by the Revenue.
2004 (12) TMI 281 - CESTAT, KOLKATA Smt. Archana Wadhwa, Member (J) and Shri Jeet Ram Kait, Member (T)
Third Member on Reference : Shri M.P. Bohra, Member (J)
[Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. - Vide his impugned order, Commissioner of Customs (Airport), Kolkata, has confirmed duty of Rs. 65,06,775.00/- under Section 17(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 125(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, apart from confiscating the C.T. Scanner and its spares imported by the appellants during the period 1989 to 1992 aft... ... ...
2004 (2) TMI 247 - CESTAT, MUMBAI The appeal was disposed of with the duty demand set aside, while the confiscation and penalty were maintained. The Tribunal clarified that duty is not payable if the option of redemption is not exercised, emphasizing the importance of redemption of confiscated goods under Section 125(2) of the Customs Act. The appellants' argument that duty is not payable when goods are confiscated and not redeemed was accepted, leading to the duty demand being deemed unsustainable in the absence of redemption.
2003 (8) TMI 98 - CESTAT, CHENNAI S/Shri P.G. Chacko, Member (J) and Jeet Ram Kait, Member (T)
[Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. - The appellant had imported a whole body C.T. Scanner in the year 1990-91, which was released provisionally without payment of duty under Notification No. 64/88-Cus., dated 1-3-88 on execution of a bond which was, later on, cancelled on production of Customs Duty Exemption Certificate issued by the Director General of Health Services (DGHS). The exemption certificate was, later on, withd... ... ...
2002 (1) TMI 429 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur - Jurisdiction - Demand - Limitation - Rebate of duty... ... ...
The circular addresses a CEGAT order concerning a dispute between an importer and the Commissioner of Customs regarding duty-free imports of medical equipment under a specific notification. The CEGAT set aside the previous customs order, citing time-barred issues and jurisdictional errors in the issuance of the show cause notice. The Board discusses the continuous obligation under the exemption notification and the applicability of penalties and interest for imports made before the enactment of certain provisions. The circular suggests revisiting the approach to show cause notices and adjudications in similar cases and seeks guidance on appealing the CEGAT order to the Supreme Court.
1997 (6) TMI 218 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding that the imported medical equipment parts were eligible for customs duty exemption under a different notification than the one initially considered by the Collector.
1994 (3) TMI 185 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI S/Shri P.C. Jain, S.L. Peeran, JJ.
REPRESENTED BY : Shri M.A. Rangaswamy and Ms. D. Srimathy, Advocate, for the Appellants.
Shri B.K. Singh, SDR, for the Respondents.
[Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. -
The appellant, importer, is aggrieved with the order of the Collector of Customs, Bombay. The Importer had imported "Cat Scanner Equipment" and claimed the benefit of Notification No. 64/88-Cus., dt. 1-3-1988. The Bill of Entry disclosed the value of the said item at Rs. 1,40,22,787.00 ... ... ...
2023 (9) TMI 651 - CESTAT CHENNAI Exemption from Service Tax - discharge of sovereign functions or commercial functions - appellant engaged in procurement and distribution of drugs and medicines for Tamil Nadu State Government Hospitals - Service classifiable under Storage and Warehouse Services or not - services rendered by TNMSCL in relation to loading, unloading, packing, unpacking and transporting of drugs to Government Hospitals should not be classified under the category of Cargo Handling Services or not - extended period ... ... ...
2022 (5) TMI 745 - CESTAT MUMBAI Benefit Exemption from duty - imported goods Skin Barriers Micropore Surgical Tapes or not - denial of benefit on the ground of incorrect understanding of the product name Wafer and held that they are not Skin Barriers Micropore Surgical Tapes - extended period of limitation - penalty - N/N. 21/2002-Cus dated 1.3.2002 at Sr. No. 363 (A) - HELD THAT:- The issue is no longer res integra as being decided by the Bangalore Bench in the case of 3M INDIA LTD, SHRI KULVEEN SING BALI, SHRI M.S. SWAMINATH... ... ...
|
