https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108900 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, waiving the deposit and staying the recovery of duty and penalty under Section 112(a) of the Act. The decision was based on the lack of specificity in the notice issued by the Commissioner, which failed to clearly demand duty payment for medical equipment imported under Notification 64/88. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of providing explicit notices for duty payment in cases of exemption non-compliance, ensuring procedural fairness and adherence to legal provisions. en-us Fri, 28 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Apr 2012 14:16:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108900 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, waiving the deposit and staying the recovery of duty and penalty under Section 112(a) of the Act. The decision was based on the lack of specificity in the notice issued by the Commissioner, which failed to clearly demand duty payment for medical equipment imported under Notification 64/88. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of providing explicit notices for duty payment in cases of exemption non-compliance, ensuring procedural fairness and adherence to legal provisions. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 28 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108900