2005 (6) TMI 311

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ondent. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Vice-President]. Heard both sides. 2. Applicant filed this application for waiver of pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 1,32,37,001/- and penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs. In this case the applicant made import of medical equipment and availed the benefit of Notification No. 64/88-Cus. dated 1-3-88. Demand was confirmed and appellant failed to fulfill the condition of Not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tment to patient can be made in subsequent period is rejected by the Hon ble Supreme Court. The contention of revenue is that applicant had admitted that the treatment in the year 1995-96, the percentage of treatment of free patient is less than 40%. Therefore, the benefit of Notification was rightly denied. 5. We find that for the years 1994 97 and 1998-99 the applicant treated more than 40% .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X