9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 74X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to 329/2007 dated 6-3-2007. In the said Final Order, the appeal Nos. C/254/2004 and C/255/2004 were dismissed in view of the fact that the appellants and their Counsels did not present themselves at the time of hearing in spite of the issue of notices to them. However, the appellants have filed an application for restoration of the appeals on the following grounds. (i) The appellants recei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tead, they received the Final Order dated 6-3-2007 on 24-4-2007. (ii) In view of the above, it is submitted that the full grounds in Memorandum of Appeal filed by the applicants were not considered by the Hon'ble CESTAT and no mention was made in the Final Order regarding the applicants' claim for assessment at the Effective Rate of 40%. The order passed covers only the non-ful ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed for benefit of Notification No. 65/88-Cus., dated 1-3-1988, which provides the Effective Rate of duty at 40% for most of the items imported by the appellants. This Notification does not impose any conditions. (v) It was contended that in the following orders, some of the goods imported by the appellants were given the benefit of Notification No. 65/88-Cus. (a) Order-in-Original No. VIII ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eserves to be set aside for de novo adjudication with regard to the correct liability of the appellant in terms of Notification No. 65/88-Cus. 3.1. The appellants had stated that they accorded free treatment to 40% of the out patients and reservation of 10% of the beds for in-patient treatment of the deserving patients free of charge. They submitted the 'records maintained by them to the Director ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (ii) We set aside the impugned order of the Commissioner dated 26-2-2004. (iii) The matter is remanded to the Commissioner only for re-computation of the duty liability in terms of Notification No. 65/88-Cus dated 1-3-1988, which provides 40% effective rate of duty; (iv) The penalty on Shri B.K. Rao, Managing Director, is set aside and his appeal is allowed. (Pronounced in open Court on 3-9-2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
