9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 290X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... os.1 to 3 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER T.V. NALAWADE, J.): The petition is filed for the relief of quashing of the Attachment Panchnamas dated 06.04.2004, 14.09.2004 and 02.06.2005 in respect of properties of the petitioner, for recovery of the amount of excise duty which was demanded by the respondents. 2. The petition is filed on the ground that proceedings were filed by the petitioner with B.I. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the disposal of the said proceedings before the B.I.F.R. No such step was taken by the petitioner. Today, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued a technical point that when the proceedings were pending before the B.I.F.R., the order of attachment could not have been made and so that, it may be set aside. 5. In view of the above, we observe that the demand of excise duty itself could h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot be a ground to adjourn the present petition or to give some more time to the petitioner. 7. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court holds that the interim relief cannot be continued and present proceedings cannot be kept pending. 8. The Writ Petition stands dismissed. The interim relief granted earlier stands vacated. 9. The learned Counsel for the petitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
