2011 (3) TMI 1694
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... M.JAICHANDREN For the petitioner : Mr.B.Satish Sundar For the respondent: Mr.K.Ravianandapadmanabhan O R D E R The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that this Court had been passing a number of orders, in similar facts and circumstances, as in the present writ petition, directing the respondents to release the goods in question, on t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rom other countries, for many years. The respondents are acting at the behest of certain persons, who are competitors in the business of importing of apples, as that of the petitioner. As such, the baseless allegations made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, in the present writ petition, cannot be accepted. 4. He had also submitted that, as per the provisions of Sectio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n furnishing a personal bond for the balance amount, is arbitrary and inappropriate. 5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents had submitted that the original contract, based on which the petitioner had imported the goods in question, does not seem to be genuine in nature. There are many discrepancies found in the documents produced by the petitioner before the respondent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e pleased to order provisional release of goods in question, on the petitioner paying 50% of the differential duty, in cash, and on his furnishing a personal bond for the balance amount, subject to the adjudication proceedings to be conducted by the respondents. 7. In view of the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and in the counter affidavit filed on behalf r....
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
TaxTMI