2008 (12) TMI 452

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Priya Murugappan, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order per : P. Karthikeyan, Member (T)]. -   This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The impugned order allowed benefit of Notification No. 16/2000-Cus. dated 1-3-2000 to an item of medical equipment namely 'Diode Laser' imported by the respondents vide Bill of Entry No. 273096 dated 2-1-2001. The goods were described by the respondent i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 'almost all the equipments in the list are used in ophthalmology'. He held that notification had to be interpreted strictly in terms of the language used. Diode laser was medical equipment entitled to exemption as per the notification. 2. The Revenue has challenged the finding and the order of the Commissioner on the basis of a letter of the CBEC dated 15-9-99 which had clarified that the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tification benefit could not be denied to the impugned item and that the impugned order deserved to be sustained. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions of both sides and the facts of the case. The original authority had denied the exemption to 'diode laser', the item in question, for the reason that it appeared in the table to the notification along with 'yag laser' and 'excimer ....