2018 (8) TMI 429 - AT - Customs

Duty free import of the imported consignment of spinal needle - N/N. 21/2000/CUS Sl. No 370 and 6/2006 CE - benefit of notification denied on the ground that these are available only for the assistive devises, rehabilitation(aid), and other goods for the disabled persons, as in the instant case the goods imported are spinal needle in bulk for use of patients in spinal anesthesia, (for conducting cesarean operation of pregnant women and also during some other operation like Inguinal hernia). Held that - This issue is no longer res-integra and is decided in the case of Becton Dickinson India Pvt Ltd vs. Commissioner of Customs and Excise Delhi-III 2015 (6) TMI 335 - CESTAT NEW DELHI , where the Hon ble Tribunal has allowed the benefit to the imported item which is quite similar to the one imported by the appellant. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues: Availability of benefit under notification for duty-free import of spinal needles.

Analysis:
1. Facts of the Case: The appellant imported a consignment of spinal needles and claimed exemption under specific notifications. The Adjudicating Authority denied the claim, stating the exemption was only for assistive devices for disabled persons, not bulk spinal needles for medical procedures. The Commissioner (Appeal) upheld this decision, leading to the present appeal.

2. Interpretation of Notification: The appellant argued that the Commissioner failed to consider the distinct categories of items in the notification, specifically "assistive devices" and "rehabilitation aids" for disabled persons. The appellant contended that spinal needles should be considered as assistive devices under the notification's purport, supporting this argument with specific item listings from the notification.

3. Legal Precedents: The Tribunal cited previous judgments, including Commissioner of Central Excise Coimbatore Vs. Saberwal Surgical Pvt Ltd. and Becton Dickinson India Pvt Ltd vs. Commissioner of Customs and Excise Delhi-III, where similar benefits were allowed for imported items akin to the appellant's consignment. Notably, the Supreme Court upheld these decisions, establishing a binding precedent.

4. Decision: After considering the arguments and legal precedents, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting the appellant the benefit under the notification for duty-free import of spinal needles. The judgment was pronounced on 10.07.2018, with consequential benefits, if any, awarded to the appellant.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision highlighted the importance of correctly interpreting notifications and established legal precedents in determining the eligibility for duty exemptions on imported goods, emphasizing consistency in applying such precedents to ensure fair and just outcomes in customs and excise matters.