Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Shri Shihabudeen Mannambath Versus The Principal Commissioner of Customs, The Additional Commissioner of Customs (Airport)

2016 (10) TMI 297 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

Implementation of order passed by Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) dated 30.06.2015 - redemption fine imposed ₹ 2,50,000/-, subsequently reduced to ₹ 1,50,000/- confiscation of gold from a Indian citizen - assorted gold jewellery - no stay obtained by the Department to implement the order - Held that: - as on date there is no order of stay granted by the Revisional Authority. Therefore, the Department bound to implement the order passed by the first respondent. However, the Court in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

earance. The petitioner shall also file a bond securing the interest of Revenue, in the event they succeed before the Revisional Authority. - petition allowed - decided in favor of Department on fulfilling specified requirements. - W.P.No.24967 of 2016 & WMP No.21336 of 2016 - Dated:- 12-9-2016 - T. S. Sivagnanam, J. For the Petitioner : Mr. B. Satish Sundar For the Respondents : Mrs. R. Hemalatha ORDER Heard Mr.B.Satish Sundar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Sta .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Hence, a show cause notice dated 30.01.2014, was issued, calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why the seized three gold bars totally weighing 410 gms of gold jewellary should not be confiscated under the Customs Act, 1962 read with Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 and as to why penalty should not be imposed on him and asked him to give explanation accompanied with all evidence, documentary or otherwise within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the notice, wh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d, however, rejected the appeal preferred by the Revenue. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent Department filed a Revision dated 04.11.2015 as against the orders of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals-I) and consequently, a show cause notice dated 29.01.2016, has been issued to the petitioner as to why the order-in-original should not be annulled. The learned counsel further submits that the said Revision Application is not maintainable and the Department has .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version