Disposed

K. Abdulla Kunhi Abdul Rahaman v. Additional Commissioner of Customs

Karnataka HC19 Aug 2021WA/4618/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of a writ appeal filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, granting the appellant liberty to challenge an order passed by an adjudicating authority.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was disposed of with liberty to the appellant to challenge the order dated 28.02.2015 passed by the Adjudicating Authority by way of appeal.

K. Abdulla Kunhi Abdul Rahaman Vs Additional… — Customs and Excise | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶8

WRIT APPEAL NO.4618 OF 2015 (T-TAR)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

K. ABDULLA KUNHI ABDUL RAHAMAN, S/O. ABDUL RAHAMAN, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, KANNIKKAD HOUSE, NO. 05/386, ALAMPADY, KALLAKATTA POST, KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671123. ...APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI BALASUBRAMANI V.R, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, KEMPEGOWDA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, BANGLORE - 560 300.

¶14

THE JOINT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE, NO. 503, RAJARAJESHWARI KRUPA, 3RD MAIN, OMBR LAYOUT, BANASAVADI, BANGALORE - 560043.

¶15

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR

¶16

DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE, NO. 503, RAJARAJESHWARI KRUPA, 3RD MAIN, OMBR LAYOUT, BANASAVADI,

¶17

¶18

BANGALORE - 560043. …RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI JEEEVAN J NEERALGI, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R3 )

¶20

¶21

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION 35408/2014 DATED 22/04/2015.

¶22

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J ., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

This intra Court appeal is preferred under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court act, 1961. The appellant has assailed the validity of the order dated 22.04.2015 passed by the learned Single Judge by which writ petition was preferred by the appellant in which challenge was made to the communication dated 5.6.2014 has been dismissed.

¶25

The Communication dated 5.6.2014 which was

¶26

the subject matter of the challenge in the writ petition reads as under:

¶27

Sub: Seizure of 1633 grams of gold valued at Rs.44.66 lakhs on 16.09.2013 at Bangalore Airport-Reg.

¶28

¶29

Ref: Your letter dated 26.03.2014 and 23.05.2014 for unconditional release of seized goods weighing 1633 grams.

¶30

-------------------------

¶31

With reference to the above subject and your letters dated 26.03.2014 and 23.05.2014.

¶32

2. This is to inform that Show Cause Notice issued on 13.03.2014 by the Joint Director, DRI, Bangalore in connection with the seizure of 1633 grams of gold seized at BIAL on 16.09.2013, is within a period of six months as per Section 110(2) of Customs Act, 1962, as the SCN was despatched on 13.03.2014 by the Adjudicating Authority mentioned in the SCN"

¶33

When the matter was taken up today, the

¶34

learned counsel for the revenue has produced the original record before us and has pointed out that in pursuance of show cause notice dated 13.3.2014 issued to the appellant, adjudicating authority has passed an order originally on 28.02.2015 and as per the record the aforesaid order was dispatched to the appellant on 13.03.2014.

¶35

In view of the aforesaid submission, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that, he be

¶36

¶37

granted with liberty to file an appeal against the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority vide order dated 13.03.2014.

¶38

In view of the aforesaid submission, the appeal is disposed of with liberty to the appellant to challenge the order dated 28.2.2015 passed by the Adjudicating Authority by way of the appeal in accordance with law.

¶39

It is made clear that, it will be open to the appellant to raise all such contentions as may be available to him in law and the Appellate Authority shall decide the appeal by referring to the findings contained in the order dated 22.04.2015 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court.

¶40

Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.

Sd/JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

K. Abdulla Kunhi Abdul Rahaman v. Additional Commissioner of Customs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K. Abdulla Kunhi Abdul Rahaman v. Additional Commissioner of Customs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Water Angels Vs Bengaluru Metro Rail Corporation Ltd.

M/S United India Insurance Company Limited Vs Priya @ Priya Krishnan

Bharath Raj.R Vs Chandulal Patel

Mrs. Mary John Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri T Thippeswamy Vs Shri Jayaramappa

Branch Manager Vs Mallikarjuna, Since Dead by His Lrs