9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nclined to entertain the Writ Petition as the Petitioner has efficacious alternate remedy under the provisions of Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962. We express no opinion on merit and all contentions are left open. Petition dismissed. - WRIT PETITION (ST.)NO.93700 OF 2020 - - - Dated:- 5-11-2020 - UJJAL BHUYAN ABHAY AHUJA, JJ. Mr. Anand M. Sachwani, for the Petitioner. Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Jitendra B. Mishra, for the Respondents. (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) ORDER ( Per Abhay Ahuja, J):- Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this Petition is being heard for final disposal. 2. By this Petition filed under Article 226 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the case. 3. It is submitted that Petitioner is a Chinese passport holder who was traveling to Delhi on 12th December, 2012 from Beijing. However, due to bad weather condition, the flight landed in Mumbai on 13th December, 2019 and the Petitioner for the purpose of taking domestic flight from Mumbai to Delhi cleared the green channel without declaring anything. It is submitted that an officer who had kept a discreet watch on the Petitioner s suspicious movement intercepted her and found 10 gold bars each weighing 1 Kg. 4. It is submitted that Petitioner was summoned on 13 th December, 2019, statements were recorded and the subject gold was seized under Panchnama. A complaint has also been filed before the learned Addl. Chief Met ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 13.12.2019 from 7.45 a.m. when the flight had arrived at Mumbai airport due to bad weather and footage of the Petitioner trying to clear from the Green Channel. 6. It is submitted that Petitioner is a foreign national and had never planned to visit Mumbai and it was only due to the exceptional circumstances that the flight had landed in Mumbai. It is submitted that she is regularly attending hearing in Criminal Court. Petitioner has expressed urgency for conclusion of adjudication proceedings. It is submitted by the Petitioner that the adjudicating proceedings as well as the criminal trial proceedings be completed at the earliest. 7. Vide letter dated 16th September, 2020, Respondents have replied to the letter of the Petitioner s A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pouches so as to avoid detection by Customs in order to avoid payment of Customs duty. Her husband works as a milk supplier at Shan Dong which was an hours distance from Peking by flight. While proceeding to the exit gate, after clearing the green channel, Petitioner was intercepted by a lady Customs Officer in plain clothes, who asked her as to whether she was carrying contraband or dutiable goods or gold in her luggage or on her person to which she replied in the negative. However, as the Officer was not satisfied with the response, she decided to examine her baggage and conduct a personal search. Thereafter, the Officer called two independent panch witnesses to witness the personal search and examination of the Petitioner s baggage. On ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r first trip to India. Regarding the seized gold, she stated that she had brought the seized gold to take it to Hong Kong for preparation of jewellery and that she had already booked a ticket for Hong Kong on 9th December, 2019. With respect to the query whether she intended to make jewellery of the 10 kgs of gold, the Petitioner replied that in the event, she liked the design, she would have sold same gold and made jewellery from few bars for herself. She stated that she had got the seized gold from her business man grand-father and grand mother but did not know what was his business was as he had expired about 7 years ago. 13. It is submitted that Petitioner was arrested under Section 104 of the said Act on 13th December, 2019 at 1800 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, learned Sr. Counsel for the Respondents on the other hand submits that Petitioner has remedy of appeal against the said Order-in-Original dated 7th October, 2020 before the Commissioner (Appeals). 17. Upon hearing learned Counsel for the parties and having regard to the fact that the Order-in-Original dated 7th October, 2020 has already been passed by the adjudicating authority in respect of the show cause notice dated 29th January, 2020, it would be just and proper if the Petitioner seeks her redress before the appellate forum. Consequently, we are not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition as the Petitioner has efficacious alternate remedy under the provisions of Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962. We express no opinion on merit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
