Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (9) TMI 974 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

2015 (9) TMI 974 - MADRAS HIGH COURT - 2015 (324) E.L.T. 81 (Mad.) - Seizure of goods - After order of release of goods instead of refund the goods or paying the value in full revenue refunded only the partial amount - Held that:- In order to give quietus to the issue, without going into the merits of the claim made by the petitioner, the respondents are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 19.03.2004 followed by reminders dated 07.04.2004 and 21.04.2004 issued through .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ich were seized from the custody of the son of the petitioner and auctioned by the respondents, together with interest, he has before this court with this writ petition. 2. The case of the petitioner in brief is that on 12.04.2002, the son of the petitioner was to undertake a trip to Delhi by Indian Airlines Flight (IC 44). While so, on the basis of a reliable information that some goods were being smuggled, the revenue officials intensified the search operations. During such surveillance, the s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he entire goods alleging that they are smuggled goods. 3. Thereafter, a show cause notice came to be issued on 28.08.2015 (sic) under Section 124 of the Customs Act by the customs authority calling upon the petitioner as to why the goods could not be confiscated and penalty should not be imposed on him and on his son. The petitioner sent a suitable reply refuting the allegations. The goods so seized were valued at ₹ 11,66,000/- by the authorities. After holding an enquiry in the matter, by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.2004, he was advised to claim the value of the goods. Thereafter, by his letter dated 19.03.2004, when he claimed the value of the goods, he was paid only a sum of ₹ 7,29,327/- alleging that the goods were disposed of only for ₹ 7,29,327/-. However, according to the petitioner, he received the said amount without prejudice to his rights. Thereafter, he sent two notices through his counsel on 07.04.2004 and 21.04.2004 respectively claiming refund of balance amount, but there was no r .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nt involved in this matter is that after seizure of goods, necessary adjudicatory proceedings were conducted and finally, the authority decided the matter in favour of the petitioner to the effect that the petitioner and his son were neither liable to be prosecuted nor the goods were liable to be confiscated. Thereafter, the petitioner was directed to approach the authority concerned for the early release of the goods so seized. The petitioner, accordingly, submitted his representation. But, to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version