Ordinary meaning of exemption terms upheld for defibrillators and pacemakers; restrictive customs interpretation rejected.

Exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. turned on the ordinary meaning of "internal use" in relation to imported D.C. Defibrillators and pacemakers. The CESTAT treated the phrase as not requiring use inside the patient's body and noted that the Revenue produced no evidence showing the equipment could be used only outside the operation theatre. On that basis, the narrower construction urged by the Revenue was rejected, the goods were held to fall within the exemption, and the customs duty demand was not sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether D.C. Defibrillators for internal use and pacemakers imported by the appellant were entitled to exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus., dated 01.03.2002, and whether the expression "internal use" covered use in the operation theatre.

Analysis: The exemption depended on the meaning of "internal use" in the notification. The equipment in question was described as D.C. Defibrillators of substantial weight, and there was nothing to show that it had to be used inside the body of a patient. The Revenue produced no evidence to establish that the equipment could be used anywhere other than the operation theatre. In the absence of such proof, the expression "internal use" could not be given the narrower meaning suggested by the Revenue.

Conclusion: The imported goods were held to fall within the exemption, and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was allowed on the interpretation of the exemption notification, and customs duty demand was not sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: An exemption expression must be construed according to its ordinary meaning, and where the Revenue fails to establish the contrary by evidence, the benefit of the notification cannot be denied by adopting an unduly restrictive interpretation.

---