1987 (1) TMI 82

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assed an order clearing the goods, but the authorities intercepted the goods by contending that what was being cleared was not scrap material but re-usable plastic material. Against this action of the authorities the petitioners filed the aforesaid Writ Petition No. 2656 of 1986. 3. On 22nd of October 1986, after hearing the Advocates for the petitioners and the respondents and after examining the samples which were produced before me for inspection, I issued a rule making it returnable in the 4th week of March, 1987. Interim relief was also granted in terms of prayer clause (c) of that petition on the condition that the petitioners will clear the goods by pulverising the same at their own cost as mentioned in paragraph 7 of the petition....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the petitioners let alone giving a hearing to them. The Appellate Bench, therefore, was compelled to treat that order of 15th December 1986 as non-est and set aside the same. The counsel for the respondents (appellants before the Appellate Bench) asked for time to comply with the interim order passed by me. The said prayer was refused. It is thus clear that the Collector of Customs, Appeals, had sufficient opportunity to know, if he-had already not known, that before passing any order to the detriment of any party, that party must be given an opportunity of being heard. 7. Subsequently, the present petition had been filed by the petitioners in respect of similar goods which had been imported by them and which had been intercepted again ,....