Customs exemption for urinary drainage bags upheld as ostomy products within urinary incontinency sets.

Imported urinary drainage bags were treated as falling within the exemption for ostomy products and male or female urinary incontinency sets under Notification No. 208/81-Cus. The goods were classified under Heading 90.17/18, but the decisive issue was whether they satisfied the notification description. DGHS clarification, medical authorities' opinion, and supporting literature showed that the bags formed part of incontinency sets used as a hygienic aid in urinary incontinence. The Revenue's contrary reports were found unpersuasive because they did not give convincing reasons to reject the DGHS view. The goods therefore qualified for customs duty and additional duty exemption.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported urinary drainage bags were covered by Notification No. 208/81-Cus. dated 22.9.1981 as ostomy products or male or female urinary incontinency sets, and therefore entitled to exemption from customs duty and additional duty.

Analysis: The goods were treated as classifiable under Heading 90.17/18, but the real question was their eligibility for exemption under the notification. The notification specifically covered ostomy products, including male or female urinary incontinency sets. The Court relied on the DGHS clarification confirming that urinary drainage bags formed part of such incontinency sets and gave weight to the recognised medical authorities' opinion. The contrary reports relied on by the Revenue did not state convincing reasons for rejecting the DGHS view, and the medical literature and certificates on record supported the appellants' case that the bags were used as a hygienic and necessary aid in managing urinary incontinence.

Conclusion: The imported goods were held to fall within Item 22A of Notification No. 208/81-Cus. dated 22.9.1981, and the appellants were entitled to the exemption.

---