TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
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>Challenge to Customs Act draw back recovery dismissed; Exhaust appellate remedies before Article 226; Importance of appellate authority emphasized.</h1> <h3>Monesh B. Hinduja Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Customs (BRC-DBK)</h3> The court dismissed the challenge against the recovery of a draw back amount under the Customs Act, 1962. The petitioner's arguments were deemed ... Recovery of duty draw back - Rule 16 of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995 - non-application of mind - proceedings vitiated by delay and latches - HELD THAT:- This Court is unable to appreciate the challenge for more than one reason. Firstly, the grounds raised in the writ petition do not merit any serious consideration and also the grounds are not worthwhile enough for this Court to intervene in the matter of impugned proceedings, for the present. The conclusion is on the basis of the reason that the appellate remedy is available under the provisions of the Customs Act and in matters like this, it is always better for the petitioner to approach the Appellate Authority and convince the Authority on the basis of the grounds raised in the present writ petition. This Court finds that the writ petition is not maintainable - Petition dismissed. Issues:Challenge against recovery of draw back amount under Customs Act, 1962.Analysis:The petitioner challenged the respondent's demand for the recovery of a draw back amount of Rs. 62,44,846 against shipping bills, citing lack of proper application of mind and delay in proceedings. The court dismissed the challenge, stating that the grounds raised did not merit serious consideration. The court emphasized that the petitioner should first exhaust the appellate remedy available under the Customs Act before approaching the court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The court highlighted the importance of utilizing the appellate authority to address challenges to the original order, as the appellate or revisional authority is competent to assess factual explanations or challenges. The court concluded that the writ petition was not maintainable and dismissed it without costs, closing the connected miscellaneous petition.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
