9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 685X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 05.10.2016, forthwith for export. 3. The petitioner seeks appropriate direction, so that the goods can be exported and in that regard, reliance was placed on the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Commissionerate IV, Chennai dated 23.11.2016 passed in the case of Sri.Vijayalakshmi Leathers. This order was put to challenge by the said exporter by filing W.P.No.43062 of 2016, which was tagged along with other connected matters, where the other exporters were attempting to export similar type of goods. 4. The petitioners therein were aggrieved by certain conditions imposed by the Commissioner of Customs, while ordering for provisional release vide order dated 23.11.2016. The condition imposed by the Commissioner in the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 22.12.2016 by directing the provisional release of the subject goods by relaxing the rigor of the condition contained in Clause 6(i) of the order dated 23.11.2016. The relaxation, which was allowed by this Court, was by substituting Clause 6(i) with an option being given to those petitioners to seek for release of subject goods/ consignments by furnishing bank guarantee of a nationalized bank equivalent to 30% of export duty. This is so, as finished leather, as per the extent policy, is freely exportable, while, generally, unfinished leather i.e. hides, skins, leather - tanned and untanned, are subject to export duty at the rate of 60%. It was made clear that the other conditions contained in Clauses 6, 7 and 8 of the order dated 23.11.2016 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 30.1.2017, the writ petitions were closed. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the case of the petitioner herein is not different from the earlier cases, which were disposed of by this Court and the conditional order was complied with by the petitioners. Therefore, learned counsel sought for similar order in this writ petition as well. 9. The learned Senior panel counsel taking notice for the respondents, while resisting the plea, would contend that as against the order passed by this Court on 25.1.2017 in W.P.Nos.1620 to 1628 of 2017, writ appeals have been preferred and as there was a delay in filing the appeals, the matters are in the process of being listed. Therefore, the order passed in the earlier wri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
