9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (3) TMI 453X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner should approach the aforesaid authority and offer this security bond. It is found that the assets of the petitioner are worth ₹ 125/- crores as claimed by the petitioner and after taking into account the liability to the bank as well as SEZ, the security of the said assets in the form of bond is adequate, we are confident that Development Commissioner (VSEZ) shall accept the Finan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Mr. P.S. Parmar, Advs. for UOI. ORDER 1. Against the order passed by the adjudicating authority constituted under Section 21 of the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 read with Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 imposing duty / penalty, the petitioner herein filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority constituted under Section 15 of the 1992 Act. During the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the equivalent value of goods being allowed for re-export. 2. It is this condition which is challenged by the petitioner by filing the present petition. Though the arguments have been heard by the Appellate Authority but the decision is yet to be pronounced. In the interregnum, when the petitioner is allowed to re-export the goods to avoid demurrage charges which it is incurring on d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tended, that bond of the same nature as given to the SEZ Authorities be permitted to be furnished by way of security and it will be an adequate security, though not in the form of First Charge. 4. Since as per the impugned order dated 23.03.2012, the petitioner is required to furnish a suitable security to the satisfaction of Development Commissioner (VSEZ), we are of the opinion that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
