9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (12) TMI 323X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s registered office at Kundara and the second petitioner is its Executive Personnel. The company was declared as a sick undertaking under Section 3(I)(o) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985. It is now running in pursuance of the order of the Board for Industrial Financial and Reconstruction under sub-section (1) of Section 15 of the aforesaid Act. The petitioner/Compa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o clear the goods on or before 31-3-1989 by paying duty and the interest leviable thereon and further it was stated that the goods will be disposed of by public auction without further reference on failure to clear them. But, no further action was taken for more than one year and as such the petitioner was under the impression that the goods have been auctioned. By Ext. P4 letter dated 6-6-1990, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . R1(b) dated 15-7-1987 and Ext. R1(d) dated 21-9-1987 respectively calling upon the petitioner to clear the goods, no opportunity was given to show cause, nor any reasoned order was passed. The order relating to payment of duty on clearance from the warehouse is an appealable order. For this reason alone, the impugned order (Ext. P5) is liable to be quashed. 2. Learned counsel for the responde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gainst such orders, the first respondent should have passed a speaking order with reasons instead of merely issuing a notice calling upon the petitioners to clear the goods from the warehouse on payment of duty. The first respondent should have first considered as to whether in spite of Ext. P4 notice of relinquishment of title to the goods, it was just and proper to issue Ext. P5. 4. In view o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
