9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 599X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rived at, that the petitioner has not made out a case for interference with the impugned orders. As pointed out earlier, this Court cannot substitute all the findings recorded by the two fact finding authorities and affirmed by a revisional authority - petition dismissed. - WP. No. 30483 of 2002 - - - Dated:- 12-7-2017 - T. S. Sivagnanam, J. For the Petitioner : Mr. M. A. Mudimannan F ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal Authority, namely, the 3rd respondent. 4. The petitioner's case itself rests upon M/s.Arun Processors Ltd./ petitioner in W.P.No.9789 of 1999. The said Writ Petition was filed to declare the petitioner therein [M/s.Arun Processors Ltd.] as a deemed exporter under Chapter 10 of Exim policy for the year 1997 to 2002 and consequently, hold that M/s.Arun Processors Ltd. has not obliged ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and when the Notification stood suspended by virtue of the interim order, the petitioner cannot be penalised. 7. The writ petitioner was heard by this Court on several days from August' 2016. Ultimately, in September' 2016, this Court directed the learned standing counsel for the respondent Department to get written instructions as to what happened to the writ petition filed by M/s.Arun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
