Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)

1. The above 2 appeals, arising out of the different Order-in-Original, involve common issue of eligibility to the benefit of Notification No. 70/81 Cus dated 26.3.81 and Notification No.321/87 Dated : 22.9.87 to different medical equipments imported by the appellants and are hence taken up for hearing together and disposed of by this common order.

2. In Appeal No.622/94-Bom, the goods imported and sought clearance duty free was one set of Doppler unit which has been confiscated with option to redeem the same on payment of fine of Rs. One lakh on and on which duty demand of Rs.13,88,750/- has been confirmed and penalty of Rs. 50,000/- has been imposed, denying the benefit of Notification No. 70/81 Cus. (Order No. CC/16/94 ACC Dated : 04.01.94)

3. In Appeal No.650/98-BOM, the goods imported and sought clearance duty free were (I) Cardio VIO B-6/120 with standard accessories video monitor etc. (Switzerland origin), (2) Microwt M5 Holter recorder complete with accessories USA Origin and (3) Computerised tread mill R-9 USA origin, which have been confiscated with option to redeem the same on payment of fine of Rs. 15 lakhs and on which duty demands of Rs.12,45,807 and Rs. 52,296.85 have been confirmed and penalty of Rs.10 lakhs imposed by denying benefit of Notification No.70/81 Cus and Notifn. No.321/86. (Order No.14/Commr.97/App Dated : 29.12.97)

4. The Notifications stipulate that the benefit of exemption from duty is available to Research Institution subject to condition interalia that such Institute should furnish a certificate from an officer not below the rank of Under Secretary in the Ministry administratively concerned with the Institution to the effect that the import of the goods in respect of which exemption is claimed is essential for research and that the imported goods shall be used only for such purposes by research institution and that the said institution is not engaged in any commercial activity. Duty free clearance was allowed on the basis of certificate produced by the importers. Subsequently, investigation was taken up, the statement of the Medical Supdt. was recorded. DRI officers, who inspected the premises found the goods were installed in the area other than the one earmarked for research purpose. The Customs authorities were, therefore, of the view that the condition of the Notification relating to import by the Research Institution and also relating to not engaging in any commercial activity (as charges were collected for treatment/diagnosis) had been violated and hence show cause notice proposing confiscation of the imported medical equipments, recovery of Customs duties and proposing penal action against each case has been issued, which have been adjudicated by the Commissioner resulting in the above two impugned orders.

5. We have heard both sides. The appellants have clearly established that they are a Research institution carrying out research in the field of cardiac diseases and disorder. They are registered as research Institution with Ministry of Science and Technology, Department of Scientific & Industrial Research. We, therefore, agree with the appellants that there has been no contravention of the Notifications in so far as it relates to import by Research institute. Regarding recovery of charges by the appellants, as held by the Tribunal in the case of Collector of Customs vs. Murugappa Chettiar Research Centre (1998(100) E.L.T. 439(Tri), merely because some fee is charged for the service, it would not make any Institution. It cannot be stated that the appellants are engaged in any commercial activity, particularly when they clearly stated that their Institution is running on "no profit no loss" basis.. We, therefore, hold that the benefit of the above Notifications is available to the appellants, set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeals.