TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 577X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R. AKIL KURESHI AND MR. A.Y. KOGJE, JJ. For The Petitioner : Mr Vaibhav A Vyas, Advocate And Rishikesh J Mehra, Advocate For The Respondent : Mr Sudhir M Mehta, Advocate ORAL ORDER ( PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the respondents authorities in not acting upon the appellate order dated 10.09.2015 and in not releasing the gold seized from the custody of the petitioner. 2. Facts are as under:- 2.1 The petitioner, travelling from abroad, landed at Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport at Ahmedabad on 31.05.2014. He was found carrying undeclared gold on his person. The Custom authorities found that the petitioner on his person and in his baggage ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... packing material is upheld. 2.3 It appears that the Department has preferred a revision petition against such order of appellate authority. However, such order is not stayed. Pending such proceedings, the petitioner applied to the authorities for release of gold, showing his willingness to abide by the conditions of the appellate order. The authorities did not grant the request. Hence, this petition. 3. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and having perused documents on record, we notice that presently, the order of the appellate authority is in force. Under such order, the direction of the competent authority of absolute confiscation of the gold is modified. The gold seized would be released on payment of appropriate duty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate order. The Department, however, did not act on such representation. Therefore, liability to pay interest on the principal amount of duty should be restricted. In this petition, however, we are not inclined to enter into this controversy. Let the petitioner urge all contentions before the revisional authority, who is seized with the matter and an take an overall view while disposing of the revision petition of the Department. III. The seized gold would be released to the petitioner on the petitioner fulfilling these conditions and further giving security to the satisfaction of the adjudicating authority for a sum of ₹ 13,50,000/- (Rupees Thirteen Lakhs Fifty Thousand Only), which is the difference between the market value of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
