MEDINOVA DIAGNOSTIC SERVICES Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application filed by the appellants in the captioned appeal states that, in our Final Order dated 6.8.2003, their claim for the benefit of Notification No. 65/88 -Cus. dated 1.3.1988 as raised in Para 1.5.1 of the Appeal Memorandum was not considered by the Bench. We have perused the Final Order and have considered the submissions of both sides.

(2.) In our Final Order dated 6.8.2003, we had held that, in view of the Tribunal's Larger Bench decision in Lady Amphthil Nurses Institutions v. Commissioner of Customs, 2002 (83) ECC 630 (LB) : 2002 (150) ELT 776, the appellants were not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 64/88 -Cus. dated 1.3.1988.

(3.) The subject -matter of the appeal consists of two imported consignments, one consisting of "Electromyography with accessories" and the other consisting of "Probe for Ultra Sound Scanner". The two consignments were cleared under two Bills of Entry. The authorities below demanded duty on both the items by denying the benefit of exemption Notification No. 64/88 -Cus. dated 1.3.1988. Before the original authority, it appears, the party had not claimed anything under Notification No. 65/88 -Cus. 1.3.1988. However, they had claimed the benefit of concessional rate of duty under this Notification in respect of "Electromyography" before the first appellate authority. But the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the assessee's appeal on a technical ground without examining this or any other claim. In the appeal before us, one of the grounds raised by the appellants was in relation to Notification No. 65/88 -Cus. ibid. This ground [vide para 1.5.1 of Grounds of Appeal] reads as under: "The following work -sheet would go to indicate the "actual non -levied duty" on the impugned goods: