2015 (8) TMI 814

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... No.65/88-Cus before adjudicating authority and said was not considered in impugned order –– Held that:- appellants had not claimed benefit of Notification No.64/88 instead they had claimed benefit of Notification No.65/88-Cus before adjudicating authority – As per provisions of Notification No.65/88-Cus, duty liability reduced to ₹ 5,06,253/- – Therefore, appellants directed to deposit said .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Doppler and claimed benefit of Notification No. 64/88-Cus. The goods were cleared without payment of duty as per the provisions of the Notification. Subsequently, it was found that the appellants had not fulfilled the condition of the Notification. Therefore, the Director General of Health Services vide letter dated 9.11.2000 withdrew the Custom duty exemption certificate on the ground tha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the duty liability comes to ₹ 5,06,253/-. The appellants seek remand to the adjudicating authority to consider the claim under Notification No.65/88-Cus . 5. Revenue relied upon the findings of the lower authority and submitted that the appellants failed to show that they have fulfilled the post import condition of the Notification No. 64/88-Cus and the demand is rightly made. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X