9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 1163X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and also stating that he intends to re-export the seized gold. This representation was not considered and therefore, the petitioner sent another reminder on 31.05.2016. Since the petitioner was not favoured with any order, he is before this Court by way of this writ petition. Held that:- Admittedly, as on date there is no order of stay granted by the Revisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Hari Radhakrishnan For the Respondents : Mr. Vikram Ramakrishnan ORDER Heard Mr.Hari Radhakrishnan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Vikram Ramakrishnan, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents and with their consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Lower Adjudicating Authority with regard to the gold chain and permitted redemption of the same under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 on payment of fine of ₹ 1,10,000/- and applicable duty. So far as the confiscation of cigarettes, the same was confirmed. 4. The petitioner submitted a representation to the 2nd respondent on 25.04.2016 seeking for implementation of the order of the Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2016. Further, it is pointed out that the Revisional Authority is also in the cadre of the Commissioner (Appeals) and therefore, he cannot sit in judgment over the order passed by the 1st respondent. 6. Be that as it may, admittedly, as on date there is no order of stay granted by the Revisional Authority. Therefore, the 2nd respondent is bound to implement the order passed by the 1st responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
