TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (11) TMI 78
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eral (Medical), whereby the Customs Duty Exemption Certificate (CDEC) issued to the petitioners in the year 1992-93 under Notification No. 64/88-Cus. dated 1st March, 1988, is sought to be cancelled. 2. The facts relevant for the present petition are that the petitioners are a Charitable Trust registered under the provisions of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, and run a hospital known as Dr. Balabhai Nanavati Hospital and Nanavati Medical Research Centre, at Mumbai. 3. In the year 1992-1993, the petitioners intended to import sophisticated hospital equipments by availing the benefits under exemption notification No. 64/88-Cus. dated 1st March, 1988, issued under Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962. Under the said notification, hosp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....removed therefrom for private use and will not be sold or otherwise disposed off without prior permission of the Government." 5. Based on the above recommendations, the Director General of Health Services, Government of India, issued several CDEC's to the petitioners for imports of various hospital equipments duty free. One such CDEC issued by the Govt. of India on the basis of which the hospital equipments imported by the petitioners were allowed clearance duty free, reads thus:- "Certified that the hospital in respect which to exemption from payment of customs duty is claimed as necessary for running or maintenance of the hospital in terms of Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue); Notification No. 64/88 dated 1-3-1988. The hos....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... cannot be construed as a show cause notice. After the petitioners furnished requisite particulars, if the respondents wanted to cancel the CDEC, then a show cause notice ought to have been issued and without giving a personal hearing the impugned order ought not to have been passed. 8. Mr. Bharucha further submitted that merely because the Customs Authorities had issued a show cause notice alleging non-compliance with the post-importation conditions contained in Notification No. 64/88-Cus. and the adjudication order passed thereon has been upheld by this Court cannot be a ground to hold that the Directorate of Health Services could cancel the CDEC without issuing a show cause notice and without hearing the petitioners. He submitted that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... put to notice that if the post-importation conditions are not fulfilled then the CDEC is liable to be cancelled. On the basis of the particulars furnished by the petitioners, it is evident that post-importation conditions are not fulfilled and hence cancellation of CDEC cannot be faulted. In these circumstances, the grievance of the petitioners that no opportunity is given to them before passing the impugned order cannot be sustained. Mr. Desai further submitted that it was not obligatory on the part of the Deputy Director General (M) to grant a personal hearing and if on the basis of the particulars furnished by the petitioners, it could be established that there was no compliance with the post-importation conditions, then the order cance....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he action proposed to be taken, if the information found to be not satisfactory. In the instant case, as we have already observed hereinabove that the communication dated 24-2-2000 cannot be treated as show cause notice issued by the authority to the petitioner calling information from him for taking action of cancellation/withdrawal of the certificate in question, therefore, the petitioner was denied an opportunity to place relevant material before the authority and, hence, the action taken by the respondent, was without affording the opportunity to the petitioner in this regard at the threshold itself and, therefore, such action cannot be sustained. 18. The other important aspect that cannot be lost sight of is in respect of doctrine o....