2018 (1) TMI 1099

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uashing the impugned order dated 28.03.2003 issued by the Respondent No.2 (Exhibit "A1"); (b) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash the letter dated 24.8.2017 issued by the Respondent No.3 (Exhibit "A2"); (c) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction staying the implementation of the impugned order issued by the Respondent No.2 and letter dated 24.08.2017 issued by Respondent No.3;" 2. The Petition proceeds on the footing that a public sector undertaking (PSU) like the petitioner is engaged in manufacture of the goods, details of which are set out in para 4.1 of the Petition. The claim is that the petitioners are regular importer and exporter and regis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as Commission vs Collector Of Central Excise, reported in 1995 Supp.(4) SCC 541. 7. Further, the petitioner was advised to initiate some correspondence. There is a voluminous correspondence, according to Mr. Raichandani, appearing for the petitioner. On legal advise, even an application was filed invoking Section 154 of the Customs Act, 1962 styled as supplementary application, which also came to be dismissed. Then, there were representations requesting for a fresh hearing. Eventually, the matter could not be resolved by the Committee of Disputes set up to resolve disputes between interdepartmental or intergovernmental organizations and entities. It is in these circumstances that the petitioner submits that once again a request was made fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....urt is not a forum to resolve these matters. There are remedies under the Customs Act, 1962. The order that is really in issue is dated 28th August, 2003 but issued on 3rd September, 2003. That order itself records that the show cause notice is dated 3rd October, 1997. There was no reply given to this notice. The personal hearing was fixed on 10th November and 17th November, 1997. Nobody appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Being an old file, the matter could not have been kept pending. Therefore, two more opportunities were given on 25th October, 1999 and 15th March, 2003. They were also not availed of. Finally, an assessment order was issued. That assessment order was not challenged but we find from these two annexures that the Customs D....