9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (4) TMI 149X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... demand of duty and imposed a penalty equivalent to amount of duty under Section 114A of the Customs Act and has also imposed a penalty of Rs. One lakh on Dr. K. Shashidhar, Managing Director, on the ground that the conditions specified in Para 2(a) and 2(b) of the Table annexed to Notification had not been complied with by the Appellants. 3. The learned Advocate, further, submitted that Para 2(a) requires that free treatment will be provided, on an average, to at least 40% of all outdoor patients; that as per clarification given by the Indian Medical Association, Hyderabad, all patients seen by the concerned hospital within the premises as out patients/outdoor patients and outside the premises conducted as camps, are considered as outpatients/outdoor patients; that thus the finding of the Commissioner that 'an outdoor patient is a patient who receives treatment for his ailment in the hospital and for which he is not required to be admitted' is contrary to the clarification given by the Indian Medical Association; that as such they have treated more than 40% outdoor patient free during 1995-1997. He relied upon the decision in the case of Assembly of God Hospital & Research Centre, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... utions where the amount for treatment is directly received by the Hospital from the Institutions and not from the patients; that thus the condition prescribed in Para 2(b) has not been fulfilled; that the Commissioner has also relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mediwell Hospital and Health Care Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, 1997 (89) E.L.T. 425 (S.C.) wherein it has been held by the Supreme Court that "the competent Authority, therefore, should continue to be vigilant and check whether the undertakings given by the Applicants are being duly complied with after getting the benefit of the exemption notification and importing the equipment without payment of Customs duty and if on such enquiry the authorities are satisfied that the continuing obligation are not being carried out, than it would be fully open to the Authority to ask the person who have availed of the benefit of exemption to pay the duty payable in respect of the equipments which have been imported without payment of Customs duty." The learned Senior Departmental Representative, also relied upon the decision in the case of Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai v. Jagdish Cancer and Research Ce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wherein it has been held that the outdoor patients means those who are not admitted as inpatients in the hospital. In that case, the outdoor patients may be of those who come to the hospital for treatment and get the treatment without admitting themselves in the hospital. It may also refer those who are benefited by the treatment not by coming to the hospital but in the outdoor medical camps conducted by the hospital authorities. Whether Mohammed goes to the mountain or mountain comes to the Mohammed, the result is the same. In that sense whether the outdoor patient come to the hospital or the hospital authorities extend their arm to the outdoor patients wherever they are, it will refer only to the free treatment given by the hospital to the outdoor patients..." The Tribunal also followed the Madras High Court decision in the case of Assembly of God Hospital and Research Centre (supra). It has not been disputed by the Revenue that after taking into consideration the outdoor patients treated in the camps, the percentage of free treatment provided by the Appellants exceeds 40% and as such they have complied with the conditions contained in Para 2(a) of the table to the notification. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess than Rs. 500/- per month. Infact finding has been given in the impugned Order that in some cases where the fees for treatment has been shown as nil, it actually relate to patients from institutions like NGRI, CCMB, HCT etc. where the amounts for treatment are directly received by the hospital from the Institutions and not from the patients. The Apex Court of the Country has emphasized that the Hospital have to comply with the conditions specified in Notification No. 64/88-Cus., as Govt. has granted exemption from payment of Customs duty with the sole objective that 40% of outdoor patients and entire indoor patients of low income group whose income is less than Rs. 500/- per month would be able to receive free treatment in the Institution. The Supreme Court observed that "that objective must be achieved at any cost." 10. After the hearing was complete and the order was reserved, the learned Advocate has filed the photocopy of affidavit of Dr. K. Shashidhar wherein it has been mentioned that records maintained by the hospital clearly show the name of the patient and his locality, the date of admission and the disease he suffered from, type of treatment and bills of medicine give ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
