Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Calcutta
The Calcutta Medical Research ... vs Cc(Airport & Aircargo), Calcutta on 23 May, 2001
ORDER
Shri V.K. Agarwal
1. This is an application for waiver of predeposit of Customs duty amounting to Rs.1,89,92,167/- (rupees one crore eighty nine lakh ninty two thousand one hundred and sixty seven only) confirmed against Calcutta Medical Research Institute for non-compliance with the conditions contained in notfn.no.64/88 Cus.
2. Shri Bagaria, ld.adv. submits that the applicant has been established as charitable hospital in 1969 and is being considered by the income tax authorities as a charitable institution; that right from 1988-1993 the Director General of Health Services have certified them to be fulfilling the conditions specified in the notification; that they are not charging any consultation fees from the outdoor patients who come to the hospital as well as who are being treated by their mobile dispensary; that no consultation fee is charged also from the patients who come to emergency word; that only to regulate the large patients coming to the hospital they have introduced a system of registration with the hospital and they charge Rs.10/- which with the passage of time has gone to Rs.25/-. He however clarified that this registration charge is only in respect of those patients who come to consult speciality doctors. He also mentioned that notfn.no.644/88 has been rescinded w.e.f. 1.3.94 and as such they are not obliged to fulfil the conditions. He finally submitted that as they are doing charitable work by treating the patients and also providing all sorts of special treatments no duty liability should be cast upon them.
3. Opposing the prayer Shri Chaturvedi, ld.SDR, submitted that on visit by the officers it was found that they are charging fees from all the patients except the patients coming to the emergency ward and as such they have not complied with the condition of the notification that 40% of outdoor patients should be treated free of cost. The ld.SDR also reiterated the findings of the Commissioner that the (SIC) patients were not treated free except 4% to 5% to the patients belonging to the poor sections of the society. Shri Bagaria at this point mentioned that no basis for arriving at such allegations and findings has been mentioned either in show cause notice or in the adjudication order.
4. We have considered the submissions made from both the sides. It is not disputed by the Revenue that the applicants are a charitable institution providing treatment of the various ailments to the patients. The question whether the registration fees charged by them will amount to charging the fees in violation of the conditions of the notification is highly debatable point. For the purpose of the stay we are of the view that the applicants have made out a strong prima facie case in their favour and accordingly we waive the requirement of predeposit of the entire amount of duty and penalty and stay the recovery of the said amount during the pendency of the appeal. On the request of the ld.adv. and Revenue having no objection the appeal is posted for earlier hearing on 20.6.2001.
Dictated in the court.