2005 (1) TMI 200

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....man, Member (T)]. - These two appeals arise on account of the Orders-in-Original passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore, consequent to the remand order passed by the CESTAT, as per the Final Order Nos. 116 to 125/2002, dated 29-1-2002. 2. The issue relates to the entitlement of the appellants to the benefit of Notification No. 64/88-Cus., dated 1-3-1988. In the de novo order the Commi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ow that they are the same. By this act, the adjudicating authority has violated the directions of the Tribunal. Even though no statutory register has been prescribed in the notification, the appellants had maintained full records of the free treatment of outdoor patients and also free treatment of indoor patients belonging to the families with an income less than Rs. 500/- per month. It was furthe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....held. 6. We have considered the rival contentions. The adjudicating authority has come to the conclusion that free treatment was not given on account of charging of Rs. 10/- as registration fee. In our view, charging of a meagre amount of Rs. 10/- as registration fee from the patients should not stand in the way of extending the benefit of the notification. It is also seen that the adjudicating....