Page 49 - ELT_1_1st April 2020_Vol 372_Part

2020 ] COURT-ROOM HIGHLIGHTS A23

Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hrishikesh Roy on 20-1-
2020 after condoning the delay dismissed the Civil Appeal Diary No. 44323 of
2019 filed by Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai against the CESTAT
Final Order No. A/87090/2018-WZB, dated 14-8-2018 as reported in 2020 (372)
E.L.T. 88 (Tri.-Mumbai) (Keshlata Cancer Hospital Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner). While
dismissing the appeal, the Supreme Court passed the following order :
“1. Delay condoned.
2. We find no reason to interfere with the impugned order dated
14th August, 2018 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate
Tribunal, West Zonal Bench at Mumbai.
3. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
4. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.”
The Appellate Tribunal in its impugned order had held that the exemp-
tion on import of Electro Therapeutic Apparatus (Theratron Phoenix Cobalt-60)
could not be denied under Notification No. 64/88-Cus. for failure to fulfill post
import conditions such as production of installation certificate, free treatment to
patients of income less than ` 500/- per month, 10% beds allotted to patients for
treatment with the said equipment, etc. particularly when all the required docu-
ments were produced at the time of import and the clearance of goods was al-
lowed. Failure to fulfill post import conditions may lead to confiscation and not
the disallowance of exemption.
The Tribunal had further held that the failure to produce installation cer-
tificate could not be a ground to confiscate medical equipment imported under
Notification No. 64/88-Cus. when there is no allegation of non-installation of
such equipment.
The Tribunal had also held that there was no time-limit prescribed in the
Notification No. 64/88-Cus. for production of certificate of installation of medical
equipment. However, the time-limit for its production could be specified by the
Assistant Collector of Customs at the time of import. The Department having
failed to specify such period at the time of import and also in the show cause no-
tice issued after 8 years of the import, asking for production of the said certificate
after such a lapse of time was not justified particularly when the DGHS had
withdrawn the duty exemption certificate after three months of issuance of the
said show cause notice.
REPRESENTED BY : Mr. Sanjay Jain, ASG, Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR,
Ms. Meenakshi Grover and Ms. Vishaka, Advocates, for
the Petitioner.

Valuation (Central Excise) — Sales tax paid by using subsi-
dy under VAT Form 37B challans, whether includible
in assessable value?
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.M.
Khanwilkar and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Maheshwari on 18-10-2019 issued
notice in Civil Appeal Diary No. 26607 of 2019 filed by Commissioner of Central
Excise and Service Tax, Udaipur against the CESTAT Final Order No.
50401/2019, dated 6-2-2019 as reported in 2020 (372) E.L.T. 95 (Tri. - Del.) (Won-

EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st April 2020  97