Dismissed

M/S Vansh Enterprises , Kalyan E Thane v. Union of India Thru Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice , Dept. of Legal Affairs and Ors.

Bombay HC31 Oct 2018WP/11292/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petitions against seizure of computer goods were taken up on a representation for provisional release. The Respondents indicated a personal hearing would be conducted if a representation was made under Section 110-A of the Customs Act. Petitions were subsequently withdrawn on instructions.

What did the court decide?

All Writ Petitions are disposed of as withdrawn.

M/S Vansh Enterprises , Kalyan E Thane Vs Union of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

wp-10960-2018-group

¶2

S.R.JOSHI

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

	WRIT PETITION NO. 10960 OF 2018
Mr. Swan Infotec v/s.	h Pvt. Ltd., .. Petitioner
Union of India & Others	.. Respondents.
	WITH WRIT PETITION NO.11161 OF 2018
M/s. Link World v/s.	Inc. .. Petitioner
Union of India
& Others	.. Respondents.
	WITH WRIT PETITION NO.11163 OF 2018
M/s. DKS Digital v/s.	India Pvt. Ltd., .. Petitioner
Union of India
& Others	.. Respondents.
PYN Systems v/s. Union of India	WITH WRIT PETITION NO.11164 OF 2018 .. Petitioner
& Others	.. Respondents.
	WITH WRIT PETITION NO.11165 OF 2018
Matrix Info Syste v/s.	ms Pvt. Ltd., .. Petitioner

1 of 3

wp-10960-2018-group

S.R.JOSHI

Union of India & Others ..	Respondents.
WITH WRIT PETITION NO.11166 OF 2018
M/s. Anubhav Enterprises .. v/s.	Petitioner
Union of India
& Others ..	Respondents.

¶9

WITH

¶10

	WRIT PETITION NO.11167 OF 2018
M/s. Vardhaman v/s.	Jute Agencies .. Petitioner
Union of India	.. Respondent.

¶11

WITH

¶12

	WRIT PETITION NO.11292	OF 2018
M/s. Vansh Ente v/s.	rprises	.. Petitioner
Union of India		.. Respondent.

¶13

Dr. Sujay Kantawala with Mr. Kartik Vig and Ms. Poorva Patil i/b. Ashwini Kumar Prabhkar, for the Petitioner in all the Petitions. Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly, for the Respondent in all the Petitions.

¶14

	CORAM: M.S.SANKLECHA &
	RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ.
	DATE : 31^stOCTOBER, 2018.
P.C:-

¶15

At the request of the parties, all these Petitions are being disposed of finally, at the stage of admission.

2 of 3

wp-10960-2018-group

S.R.JOSHI

2 All these Petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seek release of the computer cabinet for PC powers, supply and PCB along with accessories (the said goods) in respect of which, Bills of Entries have already been filed as far back as in May and June, 2018.

¶20

3 Mr. Jetly, learned Counsel for the Respondents state that, as per investigation done by the Respondents, the said goods, prima facie, appears to be not importable. Thus, the said goods have been seized on 14^th September, 2018. In the aforesaid circumstances, Mr. Jetly, learned Counsel for the Respondents state that, show cause notice would be issued in due course, after investigations are completed in respect of the bills of entry filed.

¶21

4 However, on Section 110-A of the Customs Act, 1962 being pointed out, Mr. Jetly, on instructions, states that, if a representation is made by the Petitioner, seeking provisional release of the goods under Section 110-A of the Act, then the same would be disposed of after granting personal hearing to the Petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of applications are filed, by a speaking order.

¶22

5 In view of the statement made on behalf of the Respondent, Mr. Kantawala, learned Counsel in support of these Petitions, on instructions, seek to withdraw all these Petitions.

¶23

6 All these Petitions are disposed of as withdrawn.

¶24

(RIYAZ I. CHAGLA,J.) (M.S.SANKLECHA,J.)

¶25

3 of 3

M/S Vansh Enterprises , Kalyan E Thane v. Union of India Thru Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice , Dept. of Legal Affairs and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Vansh Enterprises , Kalyan E Thane v. Union of India Thru Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice , Dept. of Legal Affairs and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Commissioner of Cgst and Central Excise, Thane Rural Vs Nrc Ltd.

The Commissioner of Cgst and Central Excise, Thane Rural Vs Nrc Ltd.

Impact Solution Vs Union of India and 4 Ors.

M/S Vardhaman Jute Agencies , Lawrence Rd, Delhi Vs Union of India Thru Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Dept. of Legal Affairs and Ors.

Matrix Info Systems Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India through the Secretary and Ors.

M/S. Anubhav Enterprises Vs Union of India through the Secretary and Ors.