Customs exemption under hospital equipment notification required separate post-import certification; conditional stay granted on substantial pre-deposit.

Eligibility for customs exemption under Notification No. 64/88-Cus. turned on whether the hospital equipment import satisfied the notification's separate post-import certification requirement. The Tribunal treated the DGHS certificate as relevant to import approval, but found a prima facie distinction between that approval and the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare certification contemplated by para 2. On the interim stay application, financial hardship was weighed against the applicants' disclosed profits, and limitation was not examined in detail. Conditional waiver of the balance pre-deposit and penalty was granted only on payment of the specified amount within eight weeks, failing which the stay would lapse.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicants were entitled to waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of the customs duty demand and penalty arising from denial of exemption under Notification No. 64/88-Cus. dated 1-3-1988.

Analysis: The applicants challenged the denial of exemption for hospital equipment imported under the notification and pressed that the certificate issued by the Director General of Health Services satisfied the notification requirements. The Revenue maintained that Para 2 of the notification required certification by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare for the post-import conditions. At the stay stage, the Tribunal found a prima facie distinction between approval for import and the separate certificate contemplated by Para 2. The plea of financial hardship was considered against the applicants' disclosed profits, and the plea of limitation was not examined in detail at the interlocutory stage.

Conclusion: The applicants were granted conditional waiver of the balance pre-deposit and penalty upon deposit of Rs. 25 lakhs within eight weeks, failing which the stay would stand vacated.

Final Conclusion: Interim relief was granted only in part, subject to a substantial pre-deposit, and the appeal remained pending for further hearing.

---