1988 (5) TMI 169

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ance of 50,000 sets of goods declared as "Hakko Brand Intravenous Canulae and Tubing for long term use Infusion Set" claiming release of the goods under Appendix 6 of AM 1985-88 Policy. They also claimed the benefit of Notification No. 208-Cus., dated 22-9-1981 as amended by Notification No. 367/86-Cus., dated 24-6-1986. It appears that the department felt that the imported item is not 'Intravenous Canulae and Tubing for long term use' but only "Scalp Vein Set" which does not find a mention in the Notification for life saving drugs. As a sequel thereof a show cause notice calling upon the appellants to show cause as to why the goods in question be not confiscated and penalty be not imposed was issued. In reply the appellants abjured their g....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....m payment of duty under the said Notification. However the Collector of Customs, Cochin who adjudicated the case held the import as authorised giving the benefit of doubt on the basis of letters issued by the Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Exports clarifying that "Scalp Vein Sets" are covered under Entry No. 21 of List 2 of Appendix 6 to AM 1985-88 Policy but declined to give benefit of duty exemption under the said Notification holding that "in the instant case what is important is not Infusion Set for treatment of cancer" and that "in view of the fact that there are a number of Infusion Sets with variable applications and having different shapes and sizes it would not be possible to include "Scalp Vein Sets" under the heading 'Int....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to him to treat the goods imported differently for the purposes of assessment. He further contended that when the Madras and Bombay Customs Houses are allowing identical goods under OGL for nearly a decade and giving the benefit of Notification No. 208/81-Cus., dated 22-9-1981 it was not proper on the part of the Collector, Cochin to deny the benefit of the Notification in question and to support his contention he produced the copies of Order-in-Appeal No. S/49-380/85 L, dated 11-3-1987 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals) Bombay and Order-in-Appeal No. C-Cus. 1168/87, dated 6-10-1987 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals) Madras and also filed the photo copy of letter dated 29-7-1986 written by DGHS, New Delhi to M/s. Life L....