9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Interpretation of exemption notifications for imported drugs. 2. Applicability of exemption under Notification No. 382/86-Cus. 3. Classification of imported drugs under Chapter 99 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Analysis: Issue 1: Interpretation of exemption notifications for imported drugs The appellants contended that the consignments of 5-Fluorouracil U.S.P. and Cyclophosphamide B.P. should be exempt from duty based on moral grounds as they provided life-saving drugs to cancer patients without adding import duty. The drugs were initially exempt from duty by Notification No. 45/79 but were later withdrawn from the list. The appellants argued that the withdrawal was a mistake, as evidenced by their subsequent inclusion in the duty-free list under Notification No. 382/86. However, the Tribunal found that the appellants did not fulfill the mandatory requirements of the exemption notifications, such as executing a bond and maintaining accounts, rendering them ineligible for the claimed exemption. Issue 2: Applicability of exemption under Notification No. 382/86-Cus The Tribunal examined the amendments made to Notification No. 45/79, particularly the provisos related to maintaining accounts and executing a bond for claiming exemption. The amendments required strict compliance with these conditions, which the appellants failed to meet. The Tribunal emphasized that the law does not allow exemptions based on moral grounds and rejected the appeal, stating that fulfilling the conditions of the exemption notifications was essential for claiming the exemption. Issue 3: Classification of imported drugs under Chapter 99 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 The Tribunal discussed the classification of the imported drugs under Chapter 99 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. It noted that the imported items were bulk drugs and raw materials for manufacturing anti-cancer drugs, not the final life-saving drugs eligible for duty exemption under Chapter 99. The Tribunal differentiated between Cyclophosphamide for injection and Cyclophosphamide for tablets, granting exemption only to the former under Chapter 99. Similarly, it found that 5-Fluorouracil U.S.P. in bulk form did not qualify for duty exemption under Chapter 99, which applied to ready-to-use capsules and injections. Citing a previous case, the Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' findings and dismissed the appeals based on the classification of the imported drugs under Chapter 99. In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled against the appellants, emphasizing the importance of complying with the conditions specified in the exemption notifications and the correct classification of imported drugs under the Customs Tariff Act.
|
