Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Bnr Exim – Proprietary Concern vs The Central Board Of Excise And Customs on 15 June, 2023

Author: Anita Sumanth

Bench: Anita Sumanth

                                                                         W.P.No.26582 of 2013

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                              DATED: 15.06.2023

                                                    CORAM :

                                  THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

                                             W.P.No.26582 of 2013
                                                     and
                                             M.P.No.1 & 2 of 2013

                     BNR EXIM – Proprietary Concern,
                     Rep. By its Proprietor Mr.B.Nagaraj,
                     Old No.14, New No.6, Venugopal Street,
                     Vettri Nagar, Peravallur,
                     Chennai – 600 082.                                         .. Petitioner


                                                       vs

                     1.The Central Board of Excise and Customs,
                       Rep. By its Chairman,
                       Department of Revenue,
                       New Delhi.

                     2.The Director General of Foreign Trade,
                       Department of Commerce,
                       New Delhi.

                     3.The Commissioner of Customs (Expert)
                       Customs House, No.60, Rajaji Salai,
                       Chennai – 600 001.                                    .. Respondents


                     Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to
                     issue a writ of declaration calling for the records pertaining to the
                     Boards instruction no. 450/39/2012 dated 16.04.2013 issued by the
                     1st respondent, the facility Circular No.5/2013 dated 22.05.2013
                     issued by the 3rd respondent and the PN No.23(Re-2013)/2009-14
                     dated 13.08.2013 issued by the 2nd respondent and declaring the


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                     1/4
                                                                             W.P.No.26582 of 2013

                     same being without jurisdiction, arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory and
                     ultra vires of the Constitution of India and the provisions of Customs
                     Act, 1962 and Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1992.
                     [prayer amended vide order dated 09.11.2020 made in WMP
                     3743/2020 in WP 26582/2013]


                                  For Petitioner         :      Mr.Surendra Kumar Pandu

                                  For Respondents        :      Mrs.R.Hemalatha
                                                                Senior Standing Counsel
                                                                for R1, R3

                                                                No appearance for R2

                                                             ORDER

Mr.Surendra Kumar Pandu, learned counsel, appears on behalf of the learned counsel on record for the petitioner and only requests for an adjournment. Mrs.R.Hemalatha, learned Senior Standing Counsel appears for the respondents.

2. This matter was admitted on 25.09.2013 and has been listed for hearing on more than two dozen occasions. A perusal of the docket-sheet reveals that there has been no effective hearing on any date as only adjournments have been sought.

3. At one point in time, there was a representation by the petitioner to the effect that the prayer was to be amended. This has https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/4 W.P.No.26582 of 2013 not been done. On more than half-a-dozen occasions, there has been no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence, I see no reason to keep this writ petition pending any further as evidently the petitioner has no interest in pursuing the same.

4. Recording the sordid state of events as above, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

15.06.2023 Index:Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes ssm To:

1.The Central Board of Excise and Customs, Rep. By its Chairman, Department of Revenue, New Delhi.
2.The Director General of Foreign Trade, Department of Commerce, New Delhi.
3.The Commissioner of Customs (Expert) Customs House, No.60, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/4 W.P.No.26582 of 2013 DR. ANITA SUMANTH,J.

ssm W.P.No.26582 of 2013 15.06.2023 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/4