TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (3) TMI 971
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ader ORDER Heard Mr.Hari Radhakrishnan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.G.M.Syed Nurullah Sheriff, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent. With the consent on either side, the writ petition itself is taken up for disposal. 2. The petitioner is before this Court challenging an order-in-original dated 07.11.2017 passed in respect of an import made by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n claimed by the petitioner for the imported goods does not appear to be correct. Though under normal circumstances a show cause notice should have been issued, the petitioner by letter dated 12.10.2017 requested for adjudication of the case without issuing show cause notice and personal hearing. This was acceded to and the impugned order has been passed. The respondent while passing the impugned ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the Customs Act as there appears to be no allegation that the goods do not correspond in respect of the value or in any other particular with the entry made under the Act. In the impugned order, the respondent has accepted that there is no dispute in the classification of the goods. However, this Court need not adjudicate the same at this juncture since the petitioner seeks liberty to approach ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ourt is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by issuing following directions: 1. The petitioner is granted liberty to file an appeal before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 2. The petitioner is directed to pay the differential duty of Rs. 31,70,083/- in respect of the Bill of Entry No.2311679 dated ....