9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Eligibility for the benefit of Notification No. 70/81-Cus. and Notification No. 321/87 for imported medical equipments. Analysis: The appeals in question involved a common issue of eligibility for the benefit of Notification No. 70/81-Cus. and Notification No. 321/87 concerning different medical equipments imported by the appellants. The first appeal (No. 622/94-BOM) pertained to the confiscation of a Doppler unit, with a duty demand and penalty imposed, while the second appeal (No. 650/98-BOM) involved confiscated items like Cardio VIO B-6/120, Microwt M5 Holter recorder, and Computerised tread mill R-9, with duty demands and penalties confirmed. The Customs authorities alleged that the conditions of the Notifications, particularly regarding import by Research Institutions and not engaging in commercial activities, were violated, leading to show cause notices and subsequent adjudication by the Commissioner resulting in the impugned orders. Upon hearing both sides, it was established that the appellants were indeed a Research Institution engaged in research on cardiac diseases and disorders, registered as such with the Ministry of Science and Technology. The Tribunal noted that the appellants did not contravene the Notifications concerning imports by Research Institutions. Addressing the issue of recovery of charges by the appellants, the Tribunal referenced a previous case law to emphasize that charging fees for services does not automatically classify an institution as commercial. The Tribunal found no evidence of the appellants engaging in commercial activities, especially since they operated on a "no profit no loss" basis. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the benefit of the Notifications applied to the appellants, thereby setting aside the impugned orders and allowing the appeals.
|
