Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2020 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (1) TMI 1236 - AT - CustomsBenefit of N/N. 64/88-Cus. Dated1.3.1988 - import of one 9” Image Amplifier TV system for Urological Investigation - allegation that goods imported by them had not subsequently complied with the exemption Notification No.64/88 - HELD THAT:- The Notification does not prescribe any registers to be maintained though it prescribes certain conditions as above. On going through the impugned order, it is found that the learned Commissioner’s findings stress on the fact that the data submitted by the appellants was the secondary data and that original records of admission registers, discharge records of IPD and OPD, records of treatment given and evidence of income of patients. This is certainly beyond the scope of the Notification. It is also not the case of the Department that the proper authority has prescribed any such condition to maintain the records at the time of import. There are force in the appellant’s contention that to maintain the records is not one of the statutory obligations and that even as per Code of Ethics Regulations, 2002 of Medical Council of India records are prescribed to be maintained for only three years. Therefore, it is not proper to call for such records even for the satisfaction of the adjudicating authority after a period 20 years. On going through the report, the allegations against the appellants appears to be that records have not been authenticated by any competent authority; records were submitted to Assistant Charity Commissioner, Sangli; no physical evidence was readily available and mandatory installation certificate duly certified by DGHS was not available and therefore, it was difficult to verify the compliance of the conditions of the notification - The Department has not established that the appellants are not entitled for the benefit of exemption notification. Department has not submitted any proof in this regard. Expression of inability to verify will not take away the benefit granted to the importer at the time of import, particularly looking into the facts of the case, wherein, the Department sought to examine records at a later date which is more than reasonable period of time. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|