9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (7) TMI 71X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of Imports and Exports has purported to exercise authority under Clause 3 read with Clause 8 of the Import (Control) Order, 1955, as it then stood, calling upon the petitioners to show cause why the petitioners should not be debarred from importing any goods and receiving Import Licence through S.T.C. and M.M.T.C. or any other Canalising Agency. 2.Facts giving rise to this Writ Petition, brie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dance with law and in the circumstances, the Order of confiscation came to be set aside. The petitioners were further informed by letter dated 31st March 1987 that the Central Board of Excise and Customs had also decided to accept the Appellate Tribunal's decision dated 26th November, 1986. The Department did not challenge the Order of CEGAT dated 26th November, 1986 which, in the circumstances, b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vember, 1986 in favour of the petitioners. That by the said decision dated 26th November, 1986 CEGAT came to the conclusion that importation effected by the petitioners in 1984 of Fatty Acids under the three Bills of Entry dated 25 to 31 March, 1984 was valid and in accordance with law. Mr. Madon contended that by the decision of a quasi-judicial authority dated 26th November, 1986 which has acqui ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pted as correct and, therefore, the Show Cause Notice issued by the Deputy Chief Controller on 23rd December, 1986 was in accordance with law. Mr. Vyas contended that no interference is called for in this Petition because the entire matter rests at the show cause notice stage. 5.We find considerable merit in the contention advanced on behalf of the petitioners. Once a quasi-judicial authority fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
