9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1070X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ersi Dastoor i/b Phoenix Legal ORDER P.C. What is challenged in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is the communication dated 31 December 2013 of respondent No.2Asst. Commissioner of Customs (Import), (Exh.U), to respondent No.3ANZ Bank seeking to encash the Bank Guarantee of Rs.1,21,61,500/issued in favour of Commissioner of Customs, Kolkata. This Bank Guarantee was bei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lso directed appropriation of the redemption fine and penalty of Rs.1,21,61,500/out the bank guarantee submitted by the petitioner. 4. At the very outset the counsel for respondent No.3bank states that the amount of bank guarantee has already been paid to the Commissioner of Customs, Kolkata. In support of the above, learned counsel places on record a copy of the communication from respondent No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary to the settled law that during the period of limitation available to file an appeal, no coercive recovery should be made by the authorities. In support of the above submission, learned counsel cited numerous decisions of this Court. On the question of maintainability of this writ petition before this Court, it is submitted that since respondent No.3bank is situated within the territorial limit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cts, which give rise to an action. The fact giving rise to the cause of action in the present case is that the Commissioner of Customs, Kolkata has passed an adjudication order adverse to the petitioner and in a consequence of implementation of that order, the Customs authorities have invoked the bank guarantee. Merely because the bank happens to be within the territorial jurisdiction of this Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
