2021 (4) TMI 791

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the conditions contained therein, if it was desirous of selling the subject aircraft qua which permission was sought. 1.1. Mr. Tarun Gulati, learned senior counsel, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, says that the conditions imposed via the impugned communication are onerous, and in the given facts and circumstances, the petitioner should have been allowed to sell the aircraft without any condition being imposed. 1.2. In support of his plea, Mr. Gulati, inter alia, adverts to three aspects of the matter: First, the show cause notice dated 18.09.2013 has not been adjudicated upon, as yet, even though more than seven years have passed. Second, the issue raised in the show cause notice stands covered in favour of the petitioner by the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....count, it would be clear that there has been no violation of the conditions, based on which approval was granted to the petitioner qua NSAT services. 3.3. As indicated above, the petitioner has relied upon the decision of the CESTAT as affirmed by the Supreme Court rendered in Reliance Transport & Travels Ltd. (Supra) in support of its plea. Furthermore, the petitioner has also relied upon the judgement of the CESTAT rendered in Global Vectra Helicorp Ltd. v. Commissioner of Cus. (Import), Mumbai, 2015 (329) E.L.T. 235 (Tri. - Mumbai), and Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi v. Sameer Gehlot, 2011 (263) ELT 129 (Tri. - Del.) to buttress its case. 4. Having regard to the aforesaid, we had listed the matter today for Mr. Gulati to ascertain ....