Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether imported anesthesia ventilatory systems were entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. dated 01.03.2002 read with Notification No. 6/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006, and whether the Department was justified in denying the exemption and assessing the goods on merits.
Analysis: The imported equipment had already been considered in earlier Tribunal decisions involving the same or identical goods. Those decisions held that the ventilator and anesthesia apparatus were supplied in an integrated manner and could not be treated merely as an anesthesia delivery system. The Tribunal followed the earlier view and treated the issue as no longer res integra. On that basis, the claimed notification benefit was found to be available.
Conclusion: The appellants were held entitled to the benefit of the notifications, and the denial of exemption was rejected.
Final Conclusion: The assessment made against the imported goods could not be sustained, and the appeals succeeded.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an imported ventilator and anesthesia apparatus are supplied as an integrated system and earlier coordinate decisions have already accepted that description for exemption purposes, the exemption notification must be applied accordingly.