2007 (7) TMI 489

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of Health Services (DGHS), the value of the consignment is Rs. 2,75,11,988/- and the duty foregone works out to Rs. 3,78,66,864/- (since reduced to Rs. 1,10,04,795/- in the impugned order of the Commissioner). The notification in question has laid down certain conditions to be satisfied by the importer "hospital" before claiming the same. One such condition as laid down under the Table at para 2 reads as under:- "2. All such hospitals which may be certified by the said Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, in each case, to be run for providing medical, surgical or diagnostic treatment not only without any distinction of caste, creed, race, religion or language but also, - (a)     free, on an average, to at least ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng the records maintained by them and both of them had given them clean chit upto 1999 and hence the appellants cannot to said to have violated any of the conditions under the said notification now. 3.2 The learned Counsel would also rely upon a judgment in Hindustan Lever Limited and another v. Union of India and others reported in 1987 (31) E.L.T. 907 (Bombay) passed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. This judgment which examined the Government promise by way of allowing duty free import required for the manufacture of export goods, held that it was a settled principle of equity and law that where public authorities make express and equivalent promise or representation, they are bound to carry out their representation/promise. It w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... "(at least 40% of all outdoor patients should be provided free treatment and that at least 40% or may be above". (iii) Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi v. C.T. Scan Research Centre (P) Ltd. reported in 2003 (155) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) Provisions of Section 28(1) of Customs Act, 1962 were not attracted because the said section covers cases of duty not levied, short levied or erroneously refunded etc. The proposition was that in the subject case, Section 28 has no application because the exemption notification contemplates continual obligation on the part of the appellants. 4.1 It was also submitted that in the case of Hissar Medical Diagnostic & Hospitals Ltd. v. CC, New Delhi reported in 2006 (202) E.L.T. 268, this Tribunal had an o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(supra) discussed above are of immense relevance. According to this judgment, at least 40 per cent of all outdoor patients should be provided free treatment in order to be eligible for the said exemption. The Apex Court in Mediwell Hospital & Health Care Pvt. Ltd., (supra) has also laid down similar guidelines. According to these guidelines, those who have availed the said notification should ensure that the treatment of 40 per cent of the patient free of cost would continuously be fulfilled. It has further contemplated in the event of default, there should be coercive official action to perform this obligation undertaken by all such persons. In no unclear terms, the Court has directed that adherence to this condition should strictly be enf....