2008 (10) TMI 367

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rief facts of the case are as follows : Petitioner is a company engaged in the business of export of iron ore fines and in that process it filed shipping bill bearing No. 32, dated 27-8-2007 before the second respondent for the export of 41308 MTs of 61% Iron Ore Fines and also paid duty at the rate of Rs. 50/- per MT in terms of Notification No. 62/2007-CUS. dated 3-5-2007 which provides for concessional rate of export duty for export of Iron Ore of Fines of Fe content 62% and below. The second respondent assessed the shipping bill provisionally on payment of duty at the rate of Rs. 50/- per MT pending test report on the basis of PD bond submitted by the petitioner undertaking to pay differential duty along with interest in case the Fe ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d before the first respondent, issued a notice on 6-6-2008 in SB. No. 32/27-8-07-1614 directing the petitioner's banker to encash the bank guarantee. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner addressed a letter to the first respondent requesting to fix-up a day for hearing of the stay application as well as the appeal. As the first respondent had not fixed any date for hearing of the stay petition, the petitioner filed W.P. No. 13973 of 2008 seeking to restrain the second respondent from encashing the bank guarantee till the first respondent disposes of the stay application and the appeal filed by the petitioner. By the order dated 1-8-2008 this Court disposed of the said writ petition directing the first respondent to dispose of the interim ap....