9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 163X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gs - Held that:- interest of justice would be subserved by directing the first respondent to pay 50% of the differential duty instead of 40% as a condition precedent for releasing the goods during the currency of the proceedings. - Accordingly in modification of the order passed by the learned Single Judge, the appellants are directed to release the goods subject to payment of 50% of the different ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e first respondent was seized by the appellants alleging discrepancies. The appropriate authority issued a show cause notice to the first respondent. The notice was challenged by the first respondent in W.P.No.899 of 2013. 3. The first respondent filed W.P.No.16186 of 2014 for a direction to release the goods pending adjudication proceedings. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onditions. 6. The only question that arises for consideration is whether the first respondent has made out a case for release of goods pending adjudication proceedings. 7. The learned Single Judge protected the interest of the department by directing the first respondent to pay 40% of the differential duty as assessed by the department. The first respondent was directed to execute a bond for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the learned Single Judge would remain without any change. The appellants are directed to release the goods within a period of one week from the date of payment of 50% of the differential duty and execution of bond as indicated in paragraph 8 of the order passed by the learned Single Judge. 10. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the writ petition in W.P.No.899 of 2013 is p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
