9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (10) TMI 44X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the petitioner is challenging legality of the order dated February 27, 1982 passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs, Customs House, confirming the order passed by the Assistant Collector confiscating the goods imported by the petitioner. The facts leading to the passing of this order are not in dispute and are required to be briefly stated to appreciate the grievance of the petitioner. 2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the import was invalid as importation was not covered by the licence. The Deputy Collector of Customs directed confiscation of goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act. The Deputy Collector did not grant option to the importer to pay redemption fine for clearance of goods. The petitioner carried appeal before the Collector of Customs (Appeals), but appeal ended in dismissal, and that has give ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the order of the learned Single Judge, the goods were cleared and were ultimately used for blending in the presence of the Customs Officers. 4. Mr. Bulchandani, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that in view of what has transpired during the pendency of the petition, the orders passed by the authority below are required to be set aside. There is considerable me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nclusion of the authorities below on this aspect, but the orders of the authorities below are set aside in view of what has transpired during the pendency of the petition. This decision should not be construed as holding that import of whisky should be considered as raw material and that question will be determined in an appropriate case. Accordingly petition succeeds and the impugned order dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
