9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (3) TMI 77X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s from appointed warehouse, namely, Gujarat State Warehouse Corporation. Gandhi Nagar, a demand was made in a sum of Rs. 45,15,206/- 2.That proceeding was challenged in a Writ Petition before the High Court contending that the appellants had cleared the goods against payment of the necessary amounts as provided under law through a bank. The High Court, however, dismissed the writ petition. 3.In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d before this Court. 4.On 2nd November, 1992 another Order was made by this Court which reads as follows : "By our order dated September 21, 1992 we had directed the Collector of Customs to take a decision in respect of the amount payable by the petitioners and the amount paid by the petitioners and to determine the net balance due from one party to the other as per our order. We regret that no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at page 182 of the paper book and to II Annexure `I' is attached which is a letter sent by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise & Customs to the Deputy Collector (J), Central Excise & Customs. In that letter it is stated in paragraph 5 as follows : "The reasons for not recovering the said amount from the parties are as follows : The Demand drafts/Pay orders of GAIC were presented along with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat GAIC has paid the full amount to their CHA, alone cannot be the legal ground on which demand can be made from other parties, unless the bank certifies that the amount paid by GAIC is wrongly credited to other parties and rectifies the mistake by giving credit to the GAIC for the full amount." 6.In the circumstances of the case now it is clear that the appellant had made the payments and they ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
