9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 21X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s clearly a case of forum shopping and cannot be countenanced. Petition dismissed. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU AND HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA For the Petitioner Through: Mr Bharat Singh, Advocate. For the Respondents Through: None. ORDER PER 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, seeking the following prayers:- A. To issue a writ order in the nature of certiorari quashing and setting aside the impugned order of the Ld. Customs, Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi dated 02.07.2024 (Annexure- P/1), impugned order of Ld. Customs, Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 10.10.2023 (Annexure-P/2), impugned order of Mr. Dinesh Kumar Gupta, Ld. Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der various provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereafter the Act). 3. The petitioner states that he was transporting poppy seeds and black pepper from Silchar to New Delhi in a parcel wagon of Poorvottar Sampark Kranti Express (Train No.15601) on 25.11.2019. The goods reached at New Delhi Railway Station on 27.11.2019, but were detained by the officials of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Delhi Zone (DRI) for further investigation. 4. Thereafter, on 06.01.2020 the goods were seized under the seizure memo of the said date by the Intelligence Officer of Delhi Zone Unit (DZU). After the preliminary investigation, a show cause notice dated 19.05.2020 was issued and the said proceedings culminated in the impugned order dated 08.12.2021 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion by an order dated 01.12.2023 but left it open for the petitioner to avail other remedies in accordance with law. 9. The petitioner appealed the said order dated 01.12.2023 before the Division Bench of Hon ble Allahabad High Court by filing a Special Appeal Defective No.43/2024. The said appeal was also dismissed by an order dated 31.01.2024 as the learned Division Bench did not find any grounds to interfere with the order dated 01.12.2023. 10. In the aforesaid context, the petitioner once again approached the CESTAT by filing an application (Application No. 50264/2024) for restoration of his appeal. However, the same was dismissed by an order dated 02.07.2024, which is challenged in the present appeal. 11. It is apparent from the above, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
