Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J
Noorul Ayin – Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner of Customs (Appeals-I) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to customs proceedings under article 226. (Para 1 , 4) |
| 2. hearing of the petition and representation. (Para 2) |
| 3. delays in filing revisions affect writ jurisdiction. (Para 3 , 7) |
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings of the first respondent dated 01.04.2024 and for a consequential direction to the second respondent to release the goods on payment of redemption fine under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 .
2. Heard Mr.Hari Radhakrishnan, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr.K.S.Ramaswamy, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for respondents.
3. It is seen from records that the petitioner had originally challenged the order passed by the first respondent dated 01.04.2024 before CESTAT. The CESTAT, by an order dated 08.04.2025, reached the following conclusion:
“17. We now examine the remaining three cases of passenger [Mohamed Ebrahim Amsath Hanifa, Yusaf Hussain Shahul Hameed andAbdul Salam] who arrived at the Chennai domestic airport by an aircraft on a domestic run, from Mumbai domestic airport and from whose person/luggage imported goods including gold/silver coins etc. were allegedly recovered. We find tha
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
