9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 1513X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded that the first respondent is liable to pay demurrage charges for the 20% of the goods detained, on the ground that there was no detention order passed by the Customs authority and no detention certificate was issued for the same, the Learned Counsel for the first respondent submitted that for no fault of them, the first respondent has been penalised or sought to be penalised by the appellant-P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Counsel, for the Respondent. JUDGMENT [Judgment per : Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J.]. - Heard the Learned Counsel for the parties. 2. It appears that there is a confusion as to the retention of 20% of the goods viz., Muriate of Potash, which were imported through the first respondent, lying with the appellant-Port Trust at the instance of the second respondent-Customs authority for the purp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ht to be penalised by the appellant-Port Trust in spite of an application made in this regard for release of the 20% goods. However, the Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the second respondent-Customs authority has submitted that with regard to the release of the 20% of the goods, which were detained for verification/test, the said goods have also been directed to be released by an order passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
