AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Jaichandren, J.—Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the learned Central Government Standing counsel
appearing on behalf of the Respondents.
At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, as well as the Respondents, had
submitted that an order, dated 07.07.2008, had been passed by this Court, in W.P. No. 15931 of 2008, wherein, similar issues had been raised,
as in the present Writ Petition. Paragraph 5 of the said order is as follows:
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case that the Petitioner is a regular importer and he has been doing the said business for the past
five years, the Petitioner is directed to pay30% of the differential duty and for the balance amount to furnish a personal bond and on compliance of
both, the Respondents are directed to release the goods forthwith. It is always open to the Respondents to pass final orders in accordance with the
provisions of law. The Petitioner is also directed to extend his full co-operation to the Respondents for passing final orders.
In view of the said order, dated 07.07.2008, the Petitioner is directed to pay 30% of the differential duty, and for the balance amount, the
Petitioner shall furnish a personal bond. On compliance of both the conditions, the Respondents shall release the goods in question, forthwith.
However, it is made clear that it would be open to the Respondents to pass final orders, in respect of the payment of customs duty liable to be
paid by the Petitioner, if any, in accordance with the provisions of law. The Petitioner shall co-operate, fully, in the proceedings that may be
initiated by the Respondents, for the assessment of customs duty.
This Writ Petition is ordered accordingly. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition No. 1 of 2011is closed.