9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 458X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o direction to make a pre-deposit is also not correct. The duty now fixed has come down to Rs.14,99,801/- from Rs.51,82,048.50, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner will be free to re-agitate the matter before the Tribunal. For enabling the Tribunal to pass fresh order, Exhibit P9 is set aside. - WP(C).No. 16605 of 2012 (A) - - - Dated:- 10-9-2012 - MR. T.R. RAMAC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l for the Department. 3. The petitioner's grievances highlighted in the Writ Petition are in the following ground. 4. The petitioner filed an Appeal No.E/457/2007 before the the Tribunal. The order impugned is passed under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act. 5. Averments in paragraph No.2 show that proceedings were initiated against the petitioner/appellant under Rule 9(2) of the Centra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion with regard to the further steps taken, including the judgment in W.P.(C) No.27874/06, wherein this Court after addressing the plea of the petitioner to furnish certain seized records by the 1st respondent, fixed a time limit for finalising adjudication. Such records were reported as unavailable. 7. I am not going into the merits of the contentions between the parties, since what is impugne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the original order was set aside by virtue of Exhibit P1 and the petitioner got refund of the amount paid in cash. The bank guarantee was also terminated. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner produced for perusal the order passed by the Madras High Court in Writ Misc. Petition No.19248/07 in W.P.No.13075/87 dated 30.11.1988. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, all these d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
