Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J
Mohamed Bilal – Appellant
Versus
Additional Commissioner of Customs(Preventive) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenges to original order imposing penalty and confiscation; appeal pending. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner claims natural justice violation due to denied cross-examination. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. no natural justice breach in refusing co-delinquent cross-examination. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. mixed questions for appellate authority, not writ jurisdiction. (Para 8) |
| 5. writ dismissed with relaxed appeal deposit instalments. (Para 9 , 10) |
ORDER
This writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order dated
03.02.2026, which is an order in original passed by the respondent as per Section 138-B of the Customs Act.
2.By the said order, as against five persons including the petitioner, the penalty is imposed and the gold is also ordered to be confiscated.
3.When the matter came up for admission, it is pointed out by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent authority that there is an appeal as per Section 128A of the Customs Act, as against the order in original.
4.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would reply by stating that the impugned order is challenged on the ground of non compliance of principles of natural justice. The learned counsel would submit
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
