9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 314X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the release of 04.00 kg of gold imported by the petitioner in terms of an authorization issued to him under the provisions of the SEZ Act. The said finding is on the basis that the import was prior to the suspension of the authorization, which was on 19.08.2014. The letter of authorization was cancelled only on 27.03.2015. The Division Bench very clearly found that the 04.0kg of gold was imported by the petitioner when it had permission and authorization to do so in terms of the provisions contained in the SEZ Act read with the provisions of the Customs Act. The learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 3 and 6 is therefore, right in contending that the release of the gold/its value had no bearing, whatsoever, in the proceedings initia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issued by the Division Bench of this Court of this Court have been attached. 2. Sri. M A. Baby, Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that, this Court, in Ext. P12 judgment had considered the challenge (by the Customs Department) to the order passed by the Customs, Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) and had found that there was no illegality, whatsoever, in the directions issued by the CESTAT. It is submitted that the Division Bench has clearly found that the petitioner was entitled to import the 04.00 kg of gold which was the subject of proceedings before the CESTAT and before this Court. It is submitted that, since this Court had found that the 04.00 kg of gold imported by the petitioner was validly imported, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... firm or cancel the provisional attachment order by passing an order under Section 8 of the PMLA. It is submitted that the issue considered by this Court in Ext. P12 judgment is relating to the import of the gold. It is submitted that the predicate offence, in the facts and circumstances of the case, is the occurrence report filed by the Customs Department before the Economic Offences Court, alleging violation of Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962. It is submitted that the provisions of Section 135 of the Customs Act is a scheduled offence under the PMLA. It is submitted that the finding of the Division Bench that the 04.00 kg of the gold in question is not liable to be proceeded against is only on the finding that, at the time of import, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sional attachment order, in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for respective respondents as above, I am of the view that the petitioner cannot be granted any reliefs against Ext. P17 order, in this writ petition. From the facts and circumstances of the case narrated above, it is clear that this Court had directed the release of 04.00 kg of gold imported by the petitioner in terms of an authorization issued to him under the provisions of the SEZ Act. The said finding is on the basis that the import was prior to the suspension of the authorization, which was on 19.08.2014. The letter of authorization was cancelled o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
