9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (2) TMI 247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... conditions of the notification inter alia that free treatment should be provided to at least 40% of the outdoor patients, that free treatment should be provided to all indoor patients belonging to families with an income of less than Rs. 500/- per month and that at least 10% of all the hospital beds should be reserved for such patients for this purpose etc., have been contravened and hence a detailed enquiry was initiated. Officers from the Preventive Unit of the Bangalore Commissionerate visited the hospital and physically verified the equipment. The hospital was not able to produce inpatients register/outdoor patients register/case sheets of patients given free treatment. Statement of the general manager of the hospital was recorded on 30 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tice and ordering confiscation of the goods with an option to redeem them on payment of a fine of Rs. 1 lakh along with payment of duty. He also imposed penalty of Rs. 25,000/- under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, but dropped the proceedings against the DGHS. Hence this appeal. 2. The only prayer made before the Tribunal is that the duty demand may not be confirmed against the appellants as they are giving up their claim to the goods which have been confiscated and do not intend to exercise the option of the redemption of the same. In support of the proposition that duty is not payable if goods confiscated are not redeemed, the learned Counsel cites the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Indsu v. CC, Kandla - 1998 (100) E.L.T. 38 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Customs Act, 1962 when goods are redeemed, duty will have to be paid in addition to the fine imposed in view of confiscation. However, the argument before us is not that only fine is required to be paid for redemption of the imported goods. The question before us is whether duty is payable even in the event of the option not being exercised. The decision of the Supreme Court in Jagdish Cancer Research Centre cited supra does not address itself to this issue. No such argument was ever raised before the Apex Court. The contention of the learned DR that the conduct of the appellants in use of the imported equipment after import is tantamount to their having exercised the option of redemption and, therefore, they are liable to pay duty, is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
