9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 176X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es not arise. It may be pointed out that the petitioner had applied to the Policy Relaxation Committee (PRC) as far back as on 18th March, 2018 seeking relaxation of the requirement of submission of bill of exports for redemption of Advance Authorization. However, no action was taken on the same. The impugned order do not sustain - petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner. - WRIT PETI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to it, was negatived. This on the ground that in case of exports to SEZ (special Economic Zone), the petitioner had failed to produce bill of export. Thus, redemption of advance authorization dated 16th December, 2016 was refused, resulting in imposition of a penalty of ₹ 1.96 crores upon the petitioner. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that it is not disputed that there are contemp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the binding decision of this Court in Larsen Tubro Ltd. (supra) as found in the petitioner's reply to the show-cause notice. 4. Mr. Jetly, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent does not dispute the fact that the issue as such stands concluded by the above decisions of this Court. However, he submits that the respondent has challenged the order of this Court in Larsen Tubro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In the above circumstances, the question of relegating the petitioner to an alternative remedy of an appeal in these facts does not arise. It may be pointed out that the petitioner had applied to the Policy Relaxation Committee (PRC) as far back as on 18th March, 2018 seeking relaxation of the requirement of submission of bill of exports for redemption of Advance Authorization. However, no action ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
