2005 (9) TMI 438 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Change of respondent's name in the cause title of the Appeal Memorandum.
2. Early disposal of the Revenue's appeal.
3. Interpretation of Notification No. 16/2000-Cus and its applicability to the case.

Analysis:

1. Change of respondent's name in the cause title of the Appeal Memorandum:
The judgment addresses an application by the respondent to change their name in the cause title of the Appeal Memorandum from M/s. South India Drugs and Devices Pvt. Ltd. to M/s. SIDD Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. The application is supported by a certificate from the Assistant Registrar of Companies certifying the name change. The Tribunal allows this application, directing the change of the respondent's name in the cause title and other relevant sections to SIDD Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd.

2. Early disposal of the Revenue's appeal:
The respondent also filed an application for the early disposal of the Revenue's appeal. After hearing both sides, the Tribunal grants this application and proceeds to take up the appeal for immediate disposal. This decision indicates the Tribunal's commitment to expedite the legal process and ensure timely resolution of the appeal.

3. Interpretation of Notification No. 16/2000-Cus:
The judgment delves into the interpretation and application of Notification No. 16/2000-Cus in the context of the case. The Tribunal refers to a previous decision in Olympic Pharmacare Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi, affirmed by the Supreme Court. The Tribunal notes that the benefit of the notification was available for specific goods, including 'Arterial Venous Cardiopulmonary Tubings' in running length. By analyzing the notification and the goods imported by the respondents, the Tribunal concludes that the respondents were eligible for the exemption under the notification. Consequently, the Tribunal dismisses the Revenue's appeal based on the findings related to the notification's applicability and the eligibility of the respondents for the benefit.

In conclusion, the judgment addresses various issues, including the change of respondent's name, early disposal of the appeal, and the interpretation of Notification No. 16/2000-Cus. The detailed analysis provided by the Tribunal showcases a thorough examination of the legal aspects involved in the case, leading to a decision in favor of the respondents based on the application of relevant legal provisions and precedents.