9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (2) TMI 60X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding to them the goods were shipped under a bill of lading dated 11-9-1993. This date is important because as and from 14-9-1993 the subject goods were brought under the restricted list and the goods could not have been imported without a licence. The petitioner filed the Bill of Entry on 17-11-1993. Even according to the petitioners there was an enquiry by the third respondent and summons was iss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 49 of the Customs Act. 2. The third respondent has filed a counter-affidavit sworn to on 2-2-1994. In this counter-affidavit it is stated that certain investigations prima facie disclosed serious irregularities regarding the date of the bill of lading. It is emphasized that on and from 14-9-1993 the goods could not have been imported without a licence. The suspicion of the respondents is tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to Madras. The Vessel m.v. ORANJE arrived at Busan, Korea only on 23-10-1993 and sailed on 25-10-1993 carrying the subject cargo. The petitioners in response to the summons issued under Section 108 of the Customs Act gave certain statements, but could not properly explain the discrepancy. It is stated that he also waived the issue of a show cause notice and sought for adjudication. The respondents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a declaration, the truth of which is highly doubtful. Therefore, the alternative submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners for permitting them to warehouse the goods under Section 49 of the Customs Act, cannot be conceded. 4. The only direction that can be given in the writ petition is to direct the respondents to proceed to adjudicate the matter and pass orders on or before 23-2-199 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
