9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (11) TMI 64X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alia is that the petitioner's husband was an officer in the Customs Department. The petitioner is an orthodox Muslim lady and widow of late Mr. S.A. Ali, Retired Superintendent of Customs. In 1974 after the death of her husband she went to London where her daughter and son-in-law, Dr.M.A Hassan are settled. Throughout her stay from 1974 till September, 1985 she was living with her daughter and son-in-law and did not have to incur any expenditure for rent, food or other expenses. During most of the time when she resided with her son in-law, she was employed by a local manufacturer M/s. Pretty Polly Limited as a Box Operator. She was also entitled to social security benefit and received payments on that account. Being an orthodox Muslim, alth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 's certificate showing the period of employment and salary abroad and bank statement of account showing debit and credit for the last two years. She produced all the documents along with the affidavit of her son-in-law, the application was, however dismissed by an order dated 27th December, 1984. 7. Petitioner kept on repeating her request but the same was not acceeded to. The representations were made inter alia on 1st February, 1985; 6th April, 1985; 6th December, 1985, and 9th January, 1986 but all were rejected. The petitioner returned to India in September, 1985. Before her return, the petitioner was informed by the British Customs Department by a letter dated 25th April, 1985 that the vehicle should be exported out of England within ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntemplated under the Import policy. (2) That the earning of the petitioner during the period 1979-80 to 1984-85 has been Pounds 10,440 which is hardly enough to purchase Mercedes Benz car 200 and, therefore, the car has not been purchased from the earning of the petitioner. (3) That the income of the petitioner abroad was not sufficient to finance the purchase of the costly car. (4) That the contention of the petitioner that during her stay abroad from 1974 onwards the expenses were met by her son-in-law is not convincing; and (5) That in the Bank statement there are two entries of payment and receipt of the same amount of Pounds 8,893.85 made on the same day i.e. 26th April, 1984 and in the statement of Account of Mr. Hassan a sum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ile the petitioner was corresponding with the Customs authorities in India. 12. The third reason given was that it was financed by her son-in-law. This reasoning is connected with the other reasonings, because it was throughout the case of the petitioner that she had been keeping her savings with her son-in-law and when she wanted, her son-in-law gave her the cheque which was deposited in her saving account. The Account also had a credit entry of Pounds 3,062.50 which was received by the petitioner as social security benefit. The case of the respondents is that this amount of Pounds 3,062.50 which was received by her as social security benefit cannot be called as earning within the meaning of the policy. Surely it was not an illegal gain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
