2005 (1) TMI 200

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s arise on account of the Orders-in-Original passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore, consequent to the remand order passed by the CESTAT, as per the Final Order Nos. 116 to 125/2002, dated 29-1-2002. 2. The issue relates to the entitlement of the appellants to the benefit of Notification No. 64/88-Cus., dated 1-3-1988. In the de novo order the Commissioner has given a finding that the a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e adjudicating authority has violated the directions of the Tribunal. Even though no statutory register has been prescribed in the notification, the appellants had maintained full records of the free treatment of outdoor patients and also free treatment of indoor patients belonging to the families with an income less than Rs. 500/- per month. It was further submitted that more than 10% of the beds .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ntions. The adjudicating authority has come to the conclusion that free treatment was not given on account of charging of Rs. 10/- as registration fee. In our view, charging of a meagre amount of Rs. 10/- as registration fee from the patients should not stand in the way of extending the benefit of the notification. It is also seen that the adjudicating authority has found that in certain cases, th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X