2009 (8) TMI 280 - AT - Customs

Revenue objects to the extension of the benefit of Notification No. 17/2001-Cus., dt. 1-3-01 to Cardiac Stents imported by the respondents on the ground that they are not accessories of Cardiac Catheters as claimed by the importers - The imported stents are used to dilate or expand a blocked portion of coronary vessels supplying blood to the heart. The stents remain implanted in the blood vessels while the catheters are removed. It is for this reason that the Revenue contends that stents cannot be treated as accessories of Cardiac Catheters . - We find that stents are used in conjunction with cardiac catheters and they are mounted and placed after dilation of blood vessels; they are essential for cardiac catheter treatment through the process of angioplasty. Without implanting of the stents with help of catheters, the treatment is not completed and, therefore, stents are definitely to be treated as accessories and not otherwise - In the case of Boston Scientific International B.V. v. CC, Chennai, the Tribunal has accepted that stent being essential for treatment function of endoscope, have to be treated as accessories and the benefit of Notification No. 17/2001 is available - In the light of the above, we accept the claim of the importers of eligibility to the benefit of Notification

Summary

Issues:
Extension of benefit of Notification No. 17/2001-Cus. to imported Cardiac Stents claimed as accessories of Cardiac Catheters.

Analysis:
In the present case, the Revenue objected to extending the benefit of Notification No. 17/2001-Cus. to Cardiac Stents imported by the respondents, claiming they are not accessories of Cardiac Catheters. The Revenue argued that the stents, used to dilate blocked coronary vessels, are not accessories as they remain implanted while catheters are removed. However, the Tribunal found that stents are essential for cardiac catheter treatment through angioplasty, as they are mounted and placed after vessel dilation. The Tribunal considered a certificate from a Senior Cardiologist, highlighting the interdependency of stents and catheters in angioplasty procedures. Referring to a previous judgment, the Tribunal accepted that stents, being essential for treatment, should be treated as accessories, allowing the benefit of the notification. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the impugned orders, rejecting the Revenue's appeals and dismissing the cross-objections.

This judgment delves into the crucial issue of determining whether Cardiac Stents can be considered accessories of Cardiac Catheters for the purpose of extending the benefit of a specific customs notification. The Tribunal analyzed the functionality and interdependency of stents and catheters in coronary angioplasty procedures, emphasizing the necessity of stents in completing the treatment process effectively. By considering expert medical opinion and a precedent case, the Tribunal concluded that stents play a vital role in enhancing the performance of catheters during angioplasty, thus qualifying as accessories. This decision highlights the importance of understanding the medical and technical aspects of imported goods to determine their classification for customs benefits accurately.

Moreover, the judgment underscores the significance of expert opinions and precedents in interpreting complex issues related to customs notifications and import classifications. By relying on a certificate from a Senior Cardiologist and citing a previous case where a similar argument was accepted, the Tribunal reinforced the understanding of stents as essential components in medical procedures involving catheters. This approach demonstrates the Tribunal's commitment to thorough analysis based on expert evidence and legal precedents to arrive at a well-founded decision regarding the eligibility of imported goods for specific customs benefits.