2017 (12) TMI 1457

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri P.R. Sreejith, Sreelal N. Warrier & P.R. Prasanth, SCs and Girish Kumar V., CGC, for the Respondent. JUDGMENT The petitioner had imported a consignment of 'Boswellia gum against an advance licence dated 11-8-2011, issued by the 3rd respondent. As per the said advance licence, the petitioner was to discharge an export obligation worth Rs. 25,48,000/- before 10-8-2014, for the purposes o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t of the goods at the time of their import. Ext. P2 is the order of the 2nd respondent confirming a duty demand of Rs. 6,87,366/- along with applicable interest, on the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner in the writ petition that the 2nd respondent proceeded to act with undue haste in confirming the differential duty demand on the petitioner, more so, when the petitioner was pursuing the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....emption notification under the Customs Act had to be strictly construed, the petitioner could not get the benefit of concessional rate of duty, when he had not complied with the requisite procedural conditions that were insisted upon in the notification granting the concessional rate of duty. In a statement filed on behalf of the 3rd respondent, it is stated that, although initially the norms comm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the petitioner. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.R. Sreejith, the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri Girish Kumar, the learned Central Government Counsel for the 3rd respondent. 4. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, I find from a perusal of Exts. P2 and P5 orders t....