Sri Sathya Sai Inst. vs Union of India

1. This matter is placed before us as a Bench of this Court differed from the view expressed by another Bench in Mediwell Hospital and Health Care Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India and Ors., insofar as it imposes a condition to avail of the benefit of the exemption from payment of import duty in accordance with Exemption Notification No. 64/88-Customs, dated 1st March, 1988 to issue an advertisement on monthly basis in a local newspaper that the total number of indigent patients treated free was at least 40% with full particulars and addresses of each of such indigent patient.

2. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that conditions for availing exemption had been fulfilled. However, in view of the decision of this Court in Mediwell's case, the DGHS asked the petitioner to further comply with the conditions imposed by this Court, as aforesaid. The petitioner contends that fulfilment of such conditions would entail huge expenditure and will unnecessarily add to the burden of the expenses of the hospital in question. A Bench of this Court felt that this Court having laid down guidelines in Para 13 of the judgment for the purpose of the competent authority to ensure that the conditions upon which the exemptions were granted were complied with, it would be unnecessary to have further condition imposed requiring the importers to advertise the same; that mere advertisement in a newspaper would not necessarily establish that importers have in fact complied with the condition or that the statement contained in the advertisement was correct; that further verification, in any event would be necessary; that the object is to serve the indigent patients and if such object has been carried out without dispute to the full satisfaction of the respondent authority, it was unnecessary burden upon the petitioner to require a monthly advertisement to be published indicating the details of the indigent patients treated by them as directed in the Mediwell's case (supra). It is in those circumstances, disagreeing with the view this matter was referred to a Larger Bench.

3. We have carefully perused the judgment of this Court in Mediwell's case and also the order of reference. We are of the view that when it was the prerogative of the Government to grant exemption, it was for them to impose appropriate conditions for the same. If that is so, this Court need not have interposed by reason of an order as made. Therefore, we think it appropriate that the directions issued in Para 14 of the Mediwell's case shall stand overruled. If necessary, the Government may issue appropriate conditions for fulfilment of exemption.

4. With these observations, this petition stands disposed of.