SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

D.P.SHARMA, SARVESH CHANDRA
Wimco Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Director of Enforcement – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.K. Diwan, Prashant Ashar,T.K. Gadoo

ORDER

Sarveshchandra, Chairman - The application for dispensing with the pre-deposit came up for disposal today. Shri Diwan, at the outset, filed three compilations of documents 'A', 'B' and 'C. He has also filed, to facilitate appreciation of his arguments, a statement showing realisable amounts of exports and their respective positions on date. The same position has been filed in a tabular form as Chart 'A' containing references of the relevant documents in respect of outstanding GRIs as also a Chart of export performance of the appellant for the years 1981—89. These documents are taken on record. Copies of these documents have been handed over to Shri Gadoo dasti

2. Shri Diwan for the appellants submitted that in support of the dispensation application he would not claim financial hardship. He submitted that it would cause undue hardship to the appellant if he is required to pre-deposit the amount of penalty as the impugned order is ex facie untenable in law. Elaborating his argument he submitted\that although the learned Adjudicating Officer might be justified in deciding the case ex parte due to non-appearance of the appellant's counsel, there was ho justification for not consid

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top