1989 (6) TMI 58

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... disposed of by this common order. 3. The petitioners imported consignments consisting of Urine Collecting sacks. When they arrived at the Inland Container Depot, Bangalore a claim was made by the petitioners for exemption from payment of import duty under Customs Act under Notification No. 208/81 dated 22-9-1981. 4. The Assistant Collector made an order which is impugned in Writ Petition No. 3181/89 dated 16-4-1985, ordering confiscation of goods and also levied redemption fine. On further appeal by the petitioner before the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (CEGAT) the matter was remanded by its order dated 26-12-1985 and a de novo order made on 27-3-1987 by the Collector of Customs, Bangalore. The Collector orde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d the petitioner has approached this Court in this Writ Petition. 9. In Writ Petition No. 3102/89 the facts are identical with Writ Petition No. 3101/89 and the appeal by the Department filed against the Appellate Tribunal's order is said to be pending before Supreme Court. The refusal to issue demurrage waiver certificate is the subject matter of this writ petition also. 10. It is urged by Sri Chandra Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioners in all these cases that the petitioners are entitled to issue demurrage waiver certificate having regard to the fact that the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 3181/89 has succeeded before the Appellate Tribunal and in the other two cases there is a direction issued by the Appellate Tribunal to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... No. 3191/89. The effect of the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal on 25-1-1988 is that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of exemption of the Notification 208/81. On the facts of the case the delay in getting the goods released from the Railways cannot be attributed to the fault of the petitioner since it was the Customs Authorities that detained the goods. 13. On the facts of this case (W.P. 3191/89) and the other two writ petitions, the petitioners in the first case succeeded, before the Appellate Tribunal and it follows as a consequence that the petitioners are entitled to a detention certificate so that they may get the goods released without payment of demurrage charges. Though there is no Rule or Regulation under which....