Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →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 the imported goods, described as Scalp Vein Sets, fell within the entry "Intravenous Canulae and Tubing for long term use" in Notification No. 208-Cus. dated 22-9-1981 and were therefore entitled to exemption from customs duty.
Analysis: The imported goods were treated by the licensing authorities as covered by the identically worded import policy entry for "Intravenous Canulae and Tubing for long term use". The entry in the exemption notification used the same description, and the Tribunal relied on that identity of wording, along with the contemporaneous customs practice extending the benefit of the notification to similar goods, to conclude that the goods should not be denied exemption merely because they were also known by another trade description.
Conclusion: The goods were held entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 208-Cus. dated 22-9-1981, and the denial of exemption was set aside.