2000 (3) TMI 109

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Endoscopes for medicine and technical science instruments; that they imported a consignment of CCD Cameras Telecom SI CCU PAL to be fitted with sinoscopes from Germany and aimed exemption in terms of Serial No. 248 of the Table annexed to Notification No. 23/86-Cus. (sic) that the Deputy Commissioner, Customs, under Adjudication Order dated 29-10-1998, denied the exemption holding that camera has been imported separately and by its very nature it can be used interchangeably in number of endoscopia applications: that it is, therefore; not possible to treat it as a camera to be used solely or principally with sinoscope and classified it under Heading No. 90.06 of the First Schedule of the Customs Tariff Act read with list 14(C), item No. 19 o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... epted principle of interpretation of Notification; that nowhere the Notification puts a bar on import of the Camera separately and independently of the system as a whole; that also nowhere the Notification stipulates that such camera should be solely and principally used in sinosccpe. He relied upon the decision in U.O.I. v. TISCO, 1977 (1) E.L.T. (J 61) (S.C.) He also relied upon the decision in C.C., Mumbai v. Shefali Arts, 1999 (114) E.L.T. 928 (T) wherein it was held that if the Notification requires that the machine should be used in the processing and manufacturing of gems and jewellery for the purpose of export, the benefit of the notification cannot be denied because some goods were sold in the local market and if it were intention .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ndia Pvt. Ltd demonstrated the use of this camera in sinoscopy." No material has been brought on record by the Revenue to show that the impugned goods is a general purpose endoscopic medical camera used in varities of endoscopic and microsurgery. It is not evident whether Dr. Ranjan Mathew, before expressing his views, has seen the impugned product. Similarly the adjudicating authority has not compared the Camera manufactured by Circon with the camera in question. In their appeal before Commissioner (Appeals), the Appellants had clearly averred that CCD Camera imported by them cannot be compared with Circon Camera. Further, their Managing Director has clearly mentioned in his Letter dated 10-8-1998 that Camera cannot be used for any other p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X