TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court Orders Respondent to Evaluate Petition, Sets Seven-Day Timeline</h1> The court directed the first respondent to evaluate the petitioner's representation and make a decision within seven days. The writ petition was disposed ... Release of seized goods - 'Men's shoes (unbranded) - it is contended that there is no impediment for the respondents to release the goods which are imported under the above said Bill of entry - Held that: - the first respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 30.05.2017 and pass appropriate orders on the same on merits and in accordance with law - decided in favor of petitioner. Issues:1. Petition seeking mandamus to release imported goods and issue detention certificate.Analysis:The petitioner filed a petition seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to release the imported goods, specifically unbranded men's shoes, under a particular Bill of Entry and to issue a detention certificate for the goods. The petitioner contended that the goods had been assessed, and relevant duty had been paid, hence there should be no hindrance in releasing the goods. Despite making a representation to the first respondent, the goods were not released, and the representation remained pending. The petitioner sought intervention from the court to compel the respondents to release the goods.The court heard arguments from both sides. The petitioner's counsel emphasized that there was no valid reason for the delay in releasing the goods, as all necessary procedures had been completed. On the other hand, the respondents' counsel assured that the first respondent would review the representation and take appropriate action promptly. After considering the submissions and circumstances presented by both parties, the court directed the first respondent to evaluate the petitioner's representation dated 30.05.2017 and make a decision based on merit and in accordance with the law within seven days from the receipt of the court's order.In conclusion, the court disposed of the writ petition by instructing the first respondent to address the petitioner's representation promptly. The court did not impose any costs on either party, and all related miscellaneous petitions were closed as a result of this judgment.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
