A.P.SEN, E.S.VENKATARAMIAH, O.CHHINNAPPA REDDY
Liberty Oil Mills – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
12. We may notice here the argument of Shri V. P. Raman that Clause 11 (4) excludes the application of Clause 8-B to goods by Open General Licence. We find no substance in this submission. Clause 8-B expressely provides that action clause may be taken "notwithstanding anything contained in this order". In view of this non obstante clause, we have no doubt that Clause 8-B applies equally to goods covered by Open General Licence.
13. We may mention at this juncture that Clauses 8-A and 8-B were not to be found in the Imports (Control) Order, 1955 originally but were introduced into it later by way of amendment, to make provision for the making of interim orders pending investigation into allegation under Clause 8. The amendment was in consequence of the lacuna being pointed out by the Bombay High Court in some cases which came before it.
14. To be fair to the learned counsel for the petitioner and the other learned counsel for the interveners, all of them were unanimous about the necessity for a provision like Clause 8-B and none of them argued standing find 8-B the standing view no equally that Clause 8-B would be ultra vires if the principle of natural justice could be read into it.
distinguished : Chingleput Bottlers v. Majestic Bottling Co.
relied on : Barium Chemicals Ltd. v. Company Law Board
Rohtas Industries Ltd. v. S.D.Agarwal
M.A.Rasheed v. State of Kerala
Shalini Soni v. Union of India
Commissioner of Income Tax v. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd.
Glass Chatons Importers and Users Association v. Union of India
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.