TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 1021X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r more than one reason. The grounds as raised in the review petition, are quite alien to the orders passed by us on the proceedings of which a review is sought. Even otherwise such was not the case of the petitioner when we decided the writ petition. Further, the order passed by the Kerala High Court dated 11th July 2023 which is in the respondent s (original petitioner s) own case staying Notification No. 5/2023 continues to operate even today and the same has not been disputed by the review petitioner. The legal position as brought about by virtue of the stay to the notification is to the effect that the department can foist the said notification and refuse clearance of the goods (apples) by applying such notification. Once the notific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hra. ORDER: 1. This review petition filed by the revenue seeks review of order dated 8th December 2023, whereby this Court had directed provisional release of perishable goods, namely apples inter alia on the ground that Notification No. 5/2023, being relied by the revenue was stayed by the Kerala High Court vide order dated 11th July 2023 passed in Writ Petition (C) No. 22281 of 2023. 2. Mr. Sethna, learned counsel for the review petitioner has submitted that Notification No.5/2023 was stayed by the Kerala High Court referring to some interim orders passed in other writ petitions, wherein although as fairly stated, the challenge in such petitions was not to the Notification No. 5/2023 concerning the import of apples, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e review petitioner. The legal position as brought about by virtue of the stay to the notification is to the effect that the department can foist the said notification and refuse clearance of the goods (apples) by applying such notification. Once the notification is stayed by the High Court, such order would be operational and binding on the department all over considering the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Supreme Court in M/s. Kusum Ingots Alloys Ltd. vs. Union of India Anr. (2004) 6 SCC 254 . Thus the department could not be heard to say that the said order passed by the Kerala High Court is not binding on the department. It also cannot be a legal position that in regard to petitioner s imports in Kerala, s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
