9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 1277X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f these special leave petitions by reserving liberty to the petitioners herein to withdraw the writ petitions filed by them before the High Court. Consequently, the impugned order would pale into insignificance as far as the petitioners herein are concerned. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioners herein to file an appeal u/s 129-E of the Customs Act, 1962 within a period of one month from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have heard Shri Uday Aditya Banerjee, learned counsel for the petitioner(s) and Shri V. C. Bharathi, learned counsel for the respondent(s)/Union of India. 2. During the course of submissions, it was brought to our notice that the petitioners have not yet filed an appeal. As the petitioners were aggrieved by the impugned provision mandating a pre-deposit of 7.5% of the penalty amount, the writ peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t to assail a provision of law as being un-constitutional by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, in the instant case, the petitioners did so even in the absence of making any attempt to file an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal/CESTAT. In other words, challenge to the constitutional validity of Section 129-E of the Customs Act, 1962 has been made in a vacuum. 6. In the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
