9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 359X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... However, while giving the option of redemption, the Commissioner (Appeals-I) passed a conditional order by virtue of which the petitioner had to pay a fine of ₹ 90,000/- and pay personal penalty of ₹ 25,000/- order not followed after lapse of several months - Held that: - as long as the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals-I) has not been modified, the petitioner being beneficiar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - W.P.No.13190 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.11559 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 6-6-2016 - Mr. T.S. SIVAGNANAM J. Mr. A. K. Jayaraj for the Petitioner. Mr. K. Mohanamurali for the Respondent. ORDER Heard Mr. A.K. Jayaraj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and Mr. K. Mohanamurali learned counsel for the respondents and with their consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Appeals-I) held that the petitioner is entitled to the option of redemption under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962. However, while giving the option of redemption, the Commissioner (Appeals-I) passed a conditional order by virtue of which the petitioner had to pay a fine of ₹ 90,000/- and pay personal penalty of ₹ 25,000/- . But, till date, this order passed by the Commissioner (A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the Commissioner (Appeals-I) has not been modified, the petitioner being beneficiary of the said order is entitled to get back the jewel on compliance of the conditions imposed by the Appellate Authority within reasonable time. The order was passed by the Commissioner (Appeals-I) on 28.09.2015 and inspite of lapse of several months, till date nothing worthwhile has transpired in the review a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
