9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 77X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed during the investigation, are directed to be released to the appellant on appellant furnishing the security bond of ₹ 10 lakhs (Rupees ten lakhs only) each for each of the trucks - appeal disposed off. - E/21038/2018-SM - - - Dated:- 16-10-2018 - SHRI S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Shri RAGHAVENDRA B HANJER - For the Appellant Shri Madhupsaran, Asst. Commissioner(AR) - For the Respondent ORDER Per : S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dt. 08/06/2018 passed by the Commissioner of Central Tax whereby the Commissioner has rejected the application of the appellant for provisional release of trucks under Section 110A of the Customs Act read with Section 12F of the Central Excise Act, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e day. The appellant also filed copies of cash receipts and delivery letters and submitted that he has applied for transfer of ownership and registration before the Regional Transport Authority at New Delhi and the same has been rejected due to non-adherence to the norms prescribed by the Delhi RTO and that copy of the rejection letter issued by Delhi RTO was also enclosed. But the DGCEI did not release the vehicles to the appellant and thereafter the appellant approached the Hon ble High Court of Karnataka and filed Writ Petition No.1949/2018 with a prayer to issue an order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the DGCEI to consider his representation dt. 23/12/2017 for release of the vehicles. The Hon ble High Court of Karnatak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of registration by the RTO authority, New Delhi. He further submitted that the affidavit filed by the original owner before the High Court as well as before the authority should be treated / considered as an evidence and the same should be considered as basis for release of vehicles. In support of this submission, he relied upon the following decisions:- i. Prashath Chandraskekhar Gundawar Other Vs. Municipal Council, Bhadrawati anr. [AIR 2009 Bom. 144] ii. Sajjan Kumar Vs. CL Verma anr. [AIR 2006 All. 36] iii. Bata India Ltd. Vs. Second DJ II Gorakhpur [LAWS(ALL) 1998 (8) 144] 4.2. He also submitted that the affidavit of the original owner having been filed as per the direction of the Hon ble High Court s order dt. 06/0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that the appellant has purchased the vehicles from Mr. Bolisetty Anuradha and has paid full consideration and has also taken possession of the said vehicles. Further I find that the appellants have also approached the RTO, New Delhi for transfer of the said vehicles in their name but the same was rejected on the ground that the appellant being resident of Bangalore and the vehicles are not complied with the Bharath Stage-IV Emission norms as per the order of NGT / Supreme Court. Further I find that the RTO, New Delhi only advised the appellant to approach the Bangalore Regional Transport authority for registration. Further I find that when the respondent refused to release th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
