2016 (10) TMI 388

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ingh, Advocate for the Petitoner. Mr. Pramod Kumar Rai with Mr. Deepak Anand, Advocate for the Respondent. ORDER In both these proceedings, the petitioners complain that their premises i.e. C-44, Vijay Vihar, Phase-I, Rohini, New Delhi and G-22, Vijay Vihar, Phase-I, Rohini, New Delhi are under continued occupation by the Commissioner of Central Excise despite the order of seizure and confis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s redemption fine. 3. It is not disputed that the petitioners did not deposit the redemption fine amount. As a consequence, the goods have been vested with the respondent- Commissioner of Central Excise and the order-in-original having been made on 30.11.2015, the respondent should have ensured that the premises i.e. two immovable properties were restored to the petitioners at the earliest time f....