2019 (10) TMI 338

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the goods are below standard. Mr Bose, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, submits that the report, to which this court will refer later on in this judgment, made contemporaneously to the time of importation, said that the goods were fit for human consumption. He alleges that if the goods have deteriorated in quality, it is due to the laches and negligence on the part of the respondents, and that they should be made liable in damages for that. In the instant writ [WP No.9124(W) of 2015, Shri Bimal Kumar Modi v. Union of India & Ors.] the appellant makes an attempt to prove that the goods at the time of importation were fit for human consumption, and that the action of the respondents in seizing and confiscating the goods was b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... opined that the goods were not fit for human consumption. On 10th July 2014, a second show-cause notice was issued by the Customs asking the appellant to show cause why the goods should not be re-exported or destroyed. On 12th November 2014, Referral Food Laboratory, Kolkata opined that the goods were fit for human consumption. Nevertheless on 13/15th March 2015, the Customs passed an order confiscating the goods. The appellant preferred the instant writ [WP No.9124(W) of 2015]. As an interim order on 15th May 2015 this court directed the goods to be tested by Central Food Laboratory, Kolkata upon the samples being drawn in the presence of the appellant's representative. The impugned adjudication order dated 13/15th March 2015 was ....