9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 755X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of Custom, Terminal-3, IGI Airport, New Delhi to the extent that it only released part of the goods of the Petitioner. It alternatively seeks directions permitting the Petitioner to file an appeal challenging the impugned order dated 29th January, 2024. 3. The brief background of the case is that the Petitioner had arrived from Paris to Delhi on 28th November, 2023 and upon arriving various goods were detained by the Customs Department vide Detention Receipt No. DR/INDEL4/29.11.2023/ 003182. The details of the goods which were detained are set out below: - "1. Three Silver bars 2. One Gold Kada 3. One Gold chain 4. One Gold Bar" 4. After the detention, the Petitioner allegedly had given a statement under Section 108 of the Custo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... detained vide DR No. DR/INDEL4/29.11.2023/003182 dated 29.11.2023 under Section under Section 111(d), 111(j) & 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962; iv) I order confiscation of "One gold Kada having purity 916 weight 50 grams valued at Rs. 2,63,842/-, One gold chain having purity 918 weight 42 grams valued at Rs. 2,22,111/- collectively valued at Rs. 4,85,953/-" recovered from the Pax Krishna Murthy Shivalingaiah and detained vide DR No. DR/INDEL4/29.11.2023/003182 dated 29.11.2023, under Section 111(d), 111(j) & 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962; v) 1 give an option to redeem the goods confiscated at above at Sub-para iv) only, on payment of a fine of Rs. 70,000/ (Rupees Seventy Thousand Only) under Section 125 of Customs Act, 1962 and allowe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and seek release for the purpose of re-export. She further submitted that since the order was not served in time to the Petitioner, the Petitioner may be permitted to assail the order under Section 128 of the Customs Act. 9. The ld. Counsel for the Respondents submitted that despite several attempts being made by him, he has not received instructions as to whether any appeal has been filed or not as there is a technical glitch. The matter was then adjourned to enable him to seek instructions in this regard. 10. The matters are thus listed today. The ld. Counsel for the Department confirmed that appeals are in fact being preferred against the said Order In Original dated 29th January, 2024. 11. Heard. There are two aspects in the present ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
