9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (1) TMI 82X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he goods, but the authorities intercepted the goods by contending that what was being cleared was not scrap material but re-usable plastic material. Against this action of the authorities the petitioners filed the aforesaid Writ Petition No. 2656 of 1986. 3. On 22nd of October 1986, after hearing the Advocates for the petitioners and the respondents and after examining the samples which were produced before me for inspection, I issued a rule making it returnable in the 4th week of March, 1987. Interim relief was also granted in terms of prayer clause (c) of that petition on the condition that the petitioners will clear the goods by pulverising the same at their own cost as mentioned in paragraph 7 of the petitioners' letter dated 6th Octo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing a hearing to them. The Appellate Bench, therefore, was compelled to treat that order of 15th December 1986 as non-est and set aside the same. The counsel for the respondents (appellants before the Appellate Bench) asked for time to comply with the interim order passed by me. The said prayer was refused. It is thus clear that the Collector of Customs, Appeals, had sufficient opportunity to know, if he-had already not known, that before passing any order to the detriment of any party, that party must be given an opportunity of being heard. 7. Subsequently, the present petition had been filed by the petitioners in respect of similar goods which had been imported by them and which had been intercepted again ,by the authorities. Pendse'J., ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Division Bench. According to Mr. Bulchandani, in the instant case necessary steps for exercising the powers under Section 129D of the Customs Act have been initiated, namely an appeal has been preferred -by the department against the order of the Assistant Collector. But Mr. Bulchandani was unable to show that after that appeal has been filed a show cause notice has been given to the petitioners or an opportunity of being heard was afforded to the petitioners. Indeed, he had to admit that no show cause notice was given to the petitioners. Obviously, no opportunity of being heard was afforded to the petitioners. In law such an order is non-est but for the sake of abundant caution I declare that it is non-est and is hereby set aside. 9. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
