9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 1344X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant, it appears that wayback in 2012, the Rules came into force which was later amended on 21.6.2013 and thereafter the licence granted to the petitioner/appellant was suspended on 20.5.2016. In the interregnum, there is an import of huge quantity of Ammonium Nitrate which is now lying in the Chennai Port. In the circumstances, a show cause notice is also shown to have been issued to the petitioner/appellant as per the provisions of Section 6(#) of Explosives Act, 1884 and Rule 42 of Ammonium Nitrate Rules, 2012. As against the show cause notice issued by the second respondent, an appeal lies to the Chief Controller of Explosives. Whether the petitioner/appellant violated the norms of the Rules, etc. or whether they are entitled to se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... older dated 3.12.2014, for dealing with Ammonium Nitrate and they had applied for P5 licence, on 5.8.2015, for importing Ammonium Nitrate, but, the same was rejected by the first respondent, by order dated 19.8.2015, while the P3 licence issued by the first respondent was also suspended by the second respondent, by his order dated 20.5.2016, as an interim measure. In the meanwhile, it appears that the petitioner/appellant had placed purchase order dated 6.5.2015 and the goods were consigned by the overseas supplier by their Proforma Invoice dated 23.7.2015 and the goods are now seized by the authorities and withheld at Chennai Port. Aggrieved against the rejection of P5 licence and suspension of P3 licence as an interim measure, the petitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice issued by the second respondent, an appeal lies to the Chief Controller of Explosives. 6. According to the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, there is no violation as such pointed out and they were dealing with the goods based on the licence granted to them prior to the Rules coming into force. 7. Be that as it may, whether the petitioner/appellant violated the norms of the Rules, etc. or whether they are entitled to seek permission for moving the goods which are now lying in the Chennai Port etc., all these things would be subject matters to be considered by the appropriate authority viz., the Chief Controller of Explosives, who has got better experience as to the violation of the petitioner/appellant, if any, and after af ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
