<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2012 (9) TMI 915 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170346</link>
    <description>The hospital&#039;s appeal was dismissed as it failed to comply with the conditions of Notification No. 64/88-Cus by not treating 40% of OPD patients free, violating the notification. The show cause notice was found invalid for lacking clear allegations, breaching natural justice principles. The obligation to provide free treatment was deemed continuing despite the rescission of the notification. The hospital&#039;s request for reclassification under a different category was rejected due to insufficient evidence. The time-bar for duty recovery did not apply, and penalties and confiscation were upheld. The case was remanded for a fresh adjudication focusing on natural justice and continuing obligations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 May 2015 15:07:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=385883" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (9) TMI 915 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170346</link>
      <description>The hospital&#039;s appeal was dismissed as it failed to comply with the conditions of Notification No. 64/88-Cus by not treating 40% of OPD patients free, violating the notification. The show cause notice was found invalid for lacking clear allegations, breaching natural justice principles. The obligation to provide free treatment was deemed continuing despite the rescission of the notification. The hospital&#039;s request for reclassification under a different category was rejected due to insufficient evidence. The time-bar for duty recovery did not apply, and penalties and confiscation were upheld. The case was remanded for a fresh adjudication focusing on natural justice and continuing obligations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170346</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>