https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115316 Notification No. 64/88 required hospitals to provide free treatment to at least 40% of outdoor patients, and the dispute turned on how that threshold was to be measured. The demand had been confirmed because the appellants averaged only 39% free treatment over the relevant years, but some years crossed the 40% mark and the notification did not clearly state whether compliance had to be assessed annually or on an overall basis. Given the close proximity to the prescribed limit and the ambiguity in computation, interim protection was considered justified. Waiver of pre-deposit was granted and recovery was stayed. en-us Fri, 18 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 May 2012 10:06:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115316 Notification No. 64/88 required hospitals to provide free treatment to at least 40% of outdoor patients, and the dispute turned on how that threshold was to be measured. The demand had been confirmed because the appellants averaged only 39% free treatment over the relevant years, but some years crossed the 40% mark and the notification did not clearly state whether compliance had to be assessed annually or on an overall basis. Given the close proximity to the prescribed limit and the ambiguity in computation, interim protection was considered justified. Waiver of pre-deposit was granted and recovery was stayed. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 18 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115316