9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 1160X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itutions vs. CC, Chennai [2002(150) ELT 776 (Tri. LB)]. The present appeal of the Revenue is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner de-novo in pursuance of the above remand order of this Bench. The ld. Commissioner has dropped the demand of duty and other proposals raised in the relevant show-cause notice. 2. After examining the records, we find that the appellant's case is that the respondent-hospital failed to discharge their obligations under Notification No.64/88-Cus dt. 1/3/1988 in relation to the medical equipment (Stress Test System) which they had imported and cleared without payment of duty under Bill of Entry dt. 3/6/1991 in terms of the said notification. The notification exempted medical equipments from pay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed order are not enough to establish that the respondent-hospital complied with the requirements of the notification. Therefore, it is prayed that the Commissioner's order be set aside and this appeal be allowed. 3. Ld. Counsel for the respondent submits that it is not in dispute that the hospital is a charitable institution or that there substantial compliance by them with the requirements of the notification. It is argued that, at this stage, this is not a fit case for interference. In this connection, ld. Counsel has referred to the data given in paragraphs 16 and 17 of the Commissioner's order. Paragraph 16 gives an account of various charitable outdoor programmes conducted by the hospital to benefit poor villagers, school st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upra), but the Commissioner's order does not disclose that the said decision was considered by him. The appellant has quoted from the Larger Bench order which, in para 51 thereof, held as under: Another point that was agitated was that no time-limit for maintaining of the records was prescribed in the Notification. Now there is no doubt that Notification created a continuing obligation and since the obligation was to be met by maintaining the records, therefore, there could not be any time-limit as the obligation was co-terminous with the destruction of the imported material that is to say that unless the hospital equipment imported under exemption Notfn. No.64/88 was destroyed under the supervision of Customs liability continued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds and to permit scrutiny thereof by the Customs authorities. It was this view which was taken by the Tribunal's Larger Bench in the Lady Amphthil Nurses Institutions' case (supra). We find that the ld. Commissioner did not consider this aspect at all in the impugned order. The obviously proceeded on the presumption that some resemblance of data showing yearwise Charity and Free services was enough to meet the requirements of the notification and on the further presumption that substantial compliance with the conditions of the notification would be enough for the hospital to resist payment of duty on the medical equipment and allied penal proposals of the Department. We find that the ld. Commissioner was proceeding on wrong presum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
