TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 636X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tioner. The amount of duty required to be paid by them is much less than the amount for which they have been asked to furnish bank guarantee for release of the goods, therefore, in the circumstances we are of the considered opinion that the authorities should reconsider the matter and pass orders after duly hearing the petitioner and therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned orders dated 12-10-2011 and 16-12-2011 deserve to be and are hereby quashed. - W.P. No. 378 of 2012 - - - Dated:- 10-5-2012 - Ajit Singh and R.S. Jha, JJ. Smt. Sudha Pandit and Shri Pritam Jaiswal, Counsel, for the Petitioner. Shri S.A. Dharmadhikari, Counsel, for the Respondent. ORDER Heard on the question of admission and inte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1 in response to which the respondent authorities by the second impugned order dated 16-12-2011 have informed the petitioner that the goods have not been seized or confiscated in the proceedings under Section 110 of the Customs Act and, therefore, Section 110A of the Customs Act is not applicable to their case and provisional assessment under Section 18 of the Customs Act would be made only after they fulfill the conditions mentioned in the letter dated 12-10-2011. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is reimporting the goods and had produced all the relevant documents before the concerned authorities and in case the authorities are not satisfied with the same, it may adopt the procedure prescri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er releasing the goods. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered opinion that the authorities have not properly applied their mind to the amount required to be deposited by the petitioner as there is no order of assessment, penalty or provisional assessment quantifying their liability and admittedly no proceedings for confiscation have been initiated under Section 110 or 110A of the Customs Act against the petitioner. The learned counsel for the respondents has failed to point out any provision of law empowering the authorities to pass such as an order. In the circumstances, the authorities could not have asked the petitioner to furnish bond and bank guarantee for an amount which includes differential ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
