9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (8) TMI 65X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 27th July, 1983 and the matter was remanded to the Assistant Collector, Central Excise for decision afresh in the light of the observations made in the Order of remand. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise decided the matter in pursuance of the order of remand on 19th, February, 1986. A writ petition being writ petition No. 255 of 1986 was filed by the petitioner in this Court asserting that the adjudication dated 19th February, 1986 was bad inasmuch as the petitioner had not been given any opportunity of hearing before passing the said order. The writ petition was allowed by this Court on 21st May, 1986 and the Assistant Collector, Central Excise was directed to decide the matter afresh after hearing the petitioner. The Assistant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the provisional release of the said goods he should do the needful as required by the said letter dated 26th February, 1986. A copy of the letter dated 26th February, 1986 has been attached as Annexure 11 to the writ petition. This letter purports to contain an order dated 26th February, 1986 passed on an earlier application of the petitioner dated 18th February, 1986 for release of the goods. By this letter the petitioner was required to execute a bond for Rs. 5,18,949/- with a cash security amounting to Rs. 1,30,000/- in the shape of post office savings bank account for provisional release of the seized goods. The petitioner was also required to deposit the excise duty leviable on the seized goods. 3. It has been urged by Counsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entral Excise Rules, 1944. The said sub-rule provides that anything seized by a Central Excise Officer may, pending the orders of the adjudicating Central Excise Officer, be released to the owner on taking a bond from him in the proper form, with such security as the Collector may require. In view of this clear authorisation it is difficult to take the view that the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, acted without jurisdiction in requiring the petitioner to execute a bond and furnish security for having the seized goods released. For the same reason the submission made by counsel for the petitioner that the order contained in the letter dated 26th February, 1986, was passed without application of mind, cannot be accepted. Lastly, it was u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stly, adding of a mere ground is not sufficient unless necessary averments are made in the writ petition constituting basis for a ground in this behalf. Secondly, as seen above, there is no prayer in the writ petition for quashing the seizure of the goods on 17th February, 1986. As such there is no occasion to add a ground challenging the said seizure. A ground in a writ petition is taken only in support of some relief contained therein. A ground without a relief would be only of academic interest. 5. In the result, we find no merit in this writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed. 6. A certified copy of this order may be supplied to counsel for the petitioner within three days on payment of necessary charges. - - TaxTMI - TM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
