Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1990 (5) TMI 41

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rd 'blank'. 2. Since we have dealt with the blank in ground (a), we find the first sentence (the only sentence) constituting ground (g) making no sense. This is because in the 8th line we find a blank over which a line is put which converts a ground, which would make sense if a date had been put there into one which makes no sense. We fail to understand how the 3rd Asstt. Master has passed the said memo of appeal; perhaps she was pressurised by the fact that the Union of India was the appellant. 3. We now come to ground (e). The first part of ground (e) as it stands reads as under: "That the learned Judge failed to appreciate that the respondents herein have admitted that the vessel carrying the said goods was granted final entry on 2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ion is sought to be deliberately made. 4. We now come to ground (h). The second sentence of the said ground reads as under: "In any case, in view of the said judgment and order in the case of M/s. Wallace Flour Mills Company Limited, the Appellants herein are entitled to the time of importation into the territorial waters of India". This sentence makes no sense and it is clear that the grounds have been drafted in a hurried and casual manner. 5. Finally, we come to ground (j). The duty involved in the present matter will be about Rs. 16 lakhs since the shipments are of the aggregate value of Rs. 64 Lakhs. Thus, it is very clear that the revenue worth crores is not involved in the interim order passed by the single Judge which is the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ly that in respect of the goods which are imported into India, the point of time when they enter the territorial waters of India would be relevant for the purposes of attracting Customs duty. Gujarat and Kerala High Courts in certain decisions had cast some doubt as to the correctness -of the above approach. Subsequently, the matter had been referred to a Full Bench of the Bombay High Court of which the learned single Judge, whose decision is appealed against, was a member. In view of the Full Bench decision which was binding on the single Judge as also on us, the learned single Judge was, in our opinion, in no error in directing the release of the goods on the Petitioners submitting a bond although sum of about Rs. 16 lakhs was involved (a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hich the Respondents (Original Petitioners) have taken out. The single Judge gave his decision as far back as 12th April 1990. We find from the record that there was no application made before the single Judge for adjournment for filing a short affidavit opposing admission or for the purposes of interim reliefs. It is also to be found from the record that no application was made to the single Judge for stay of the interim order when pronounced. This would imply that the order had to be complied with forthwith and that this was the understanding of the Department. 13. Indeed, the single Judge could have disposed of the Rule but presumably refrained from so doing for two reasons, viz., (1) that she thought that she was aware that an appea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er in the Writ Petition. 17. We make it clear that we make no observations as to the question whether the belated filing of the Appeal relieves or protects the Appellants or the concerned officers from the orders sought in the contempt motion taken out by the Original Petitioners. The motion will be decided by the single Judge before whom it will come up for hearing in due course. The only observation we can make is that this (the contempt Motion) is indeed a matter which requires to be taken up in vacation. This is because the Respondents (Original Petitioners) had taken out the motion before the vacation but it was at the instance of the Appellants. It is also to be borne in mind that the Petitioners are incurring heavy demurrage every .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates