TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 116X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioned between the two. Though the petition before us was only in respect of jewellery - appeal allowed by way of remand. - 1397 with 1022 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 4-8-2009 - F.I. Rebello and D.G. Karnik, JJ. [Order]. - P.C. : Rule in both the petitions. Heard forthwith. 2. The department had approached this court against the order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal after holding that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned counsel submits that these were prohibited goods. The respondent is not the owner of the goods and as such, the Tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction in directing release of the goods in favour of the respondent by paying redemption fine. 6. We have perused the order of Commissioner of Customs dated [28th September 2005]. In Paragraph No. 19 there is a clear statement by the respondent herein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the application by the petitioner for release was maintainable. The goods by themselves were not prohibited but became prohibited by virtue of breach of law by petitioner herein. In the circumstances, we also do not find any error of law committed by the Tribunal in directing the release of the confiscated goods on payment of fine. There was discretion, which discretion has been properly exer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ete the entire exercise within six weeks. 10. Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. _______ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1700 of 2009 With WRIT PETITION NO. 1022 OF 2009 The Union of India Anr. Petitioners V/s Dhanak Madhusudan Ramji Respondent None for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
