TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1992 (11) TMI 173
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....GL Appendix 6, List 2, S. No. 10 of 1TC Policy AM 1990-93. The said S. No. 10 reads as follows :- "Ancillaries for Blood component therapy required for the treatment of cancer namely...... Butterfly Needle G. Infusion Set." The appellants also claimed (a) the classification of the goods under Tariff Heading 9018.90 with benefit of Notification 208/81 read with Notification 93/90 at nil rate of duty in respect of Scalp Vein Set (Butterfly Needle) (b) in respect of 'Infusion Sets' classification under Tariff Heading 9018.90 with benefit of Notification 65/88 effective from 1-3-1989 read with Notification 193/90 at the rate of 40% ad valorem. 1.2 The goods were shipped on 16-8-1990. At that time the description under ITC Policy under ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he sample showed following print: SAFTI WING SCALP VEIN SET This item cannot be regarded as I.V. Cannulae for long term use appearing at the Sr. No. 34 of list 2 App. 6 as the subject goods have got a stainless steel needle in place of a PVC cannulae. The needle will damage the vein if it is going to be used for long time by its sharp tip. This sharp tip will also restrict the movement of the patient. Any movement of patient will damage the vein resulting in pain and thromoesblism in the vein which is an inherent risk of using steel needle. In cannulae for long term use should have a characteristic for functioning long term use without damaging vein and creating pain and turommbemboilem in the vein. In view of the above, the goods imp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e for the appellants, Shri V. Lakshmikumaran, has fairly conceded that in view of Calcutta High Court's judgment in the case of Trio Marketing Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI [1992 (57) E.L.T. 249 - Cal.] Scalp Vein Sets cannot be considered as entitled to the benefit of Notification 208/81 inasmuch as these cannot be treated as suitable for long term use. Calcutta High Court has duly taken into consideration Tribunal's three judgments namely :- (i) M/s. Unival Surgical Traders v. C.C., Cochin [1988 (37) E.L.T. 58 (Tribunal)]. (ii) Lab India Chemicals & Others v. C.C. [1989 (40) E.L.T. 438]. (iii) M/s. K. Har Gobind Dass & Co. v. C.C., Bombay [1989 (22) ECR 563]. relied upon by the learned ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e are of the view that the matter stands settled by the judgment of Calcutta High Court, mentioned supra. Tribunal's decisions relied upon by the learned advocate for the appellants appear to have been over-ruled by the said judgment of the High Court. Accordingly, we are of the view that the appellants are not entitled to the benefit of Notification 208/81 in respect of the articles imported. 4.1 As regards the plea of the learned advocate that their claim under OGL is covered by S. No. 10, List 2, Appendix 6 of 1990-93 Policy, it is appropriate to set out the Entry at S. No. 10, as it stood in the said ITC Policy before its amendment by Public Notice 64/90-93 dated 20th Sept. 1990 and stood thereafter :- Before 20th Sept. 1990 "S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... packing is available in the market. Plain meaning has, therefore, to be given to the entry. The appellants not entitled to the benefit of the said Serial No. 10. 5.2 Assuming that the correction has been made as pointed out by the learned advocate, if we look at the photocopy of Public Notice No. 64-ITC(PN)/90-93 dated 20-9-1990 as printed in Impex Times dated 25-9-90 (also placed on record by the learned advocate), by separately mentioning "Butterfly Needle G", "Infusion set" in the said S. No. 10 of ITC Policy, we are of the view that the adjudicating authority is correct in denying the benefit on the ground of import being made before 20th Sept. 1990. There appears to be a change of Policy in allowing both the articles by this Public....