2008 (3) TMI 320

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ection with the user of advance licences by M/s. Krishna Trading Company, M/s. Meenu Exim Private Limited, M/s. Nirmal Polyester Private Limited, and M/s. Pradeep Kumar Nirmal kumar. 3. The petitioner claims that he is a proprietor of Sumit Wool Processors and is engaged in trading of imported/indigenously procuring of yarns and fabrics at Ludhiana. He is carrying on his regular business for such imports of yarn and in the course of said business, vide lawful transactions the petitioner had been either selling the said goods on High Seas or has been getting the same cleared by payment of proper custom duties after producing the Bill of Entry and other requisite documents in the course of his business, the petitioner had imported various ki....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iana as the Custom Authorities have their office at Ludhiana. 8. In support of his plea learned Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment of this course in the case of Tar Balbir Singh v. Union of India and Anr. 1992 (3) RCR (Criminal) 210, wherein this court has been pleased to lay down as under:- Considering the medical certificates attached with the criminal miscellaneous and plea that the petitioner has been suffering from the ailments, mentioned above, as also his treatment by the doctors and that would be difficult for him to undertake a journey to Bombay is accepted. At present, the petitioner is only being summoned to appear before the DRI officers for making a statement with respect to the allegations made by....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e money to defray the travelling expenses of the petitioner to Jalandhar and back. It shall, however, also be open to them to examine him at Chandigarh, if it is to convenient. With these directions, the criminal miscellaneous stands disposed of." 9. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent contends that the petitioner is not entitled to the relief claimed as his prayer to challenge the vires of Section 108 of the Act stands negatived by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat. The relief sought by the petitioner is, thus, not available to him as under Section 108 of the Act the Customs Authorities have jurisdiction to call any person to give evidence during investigation. 10. Learned Counsel for the respondent also contends that o....