Dismissed

M/S.Capgemini India Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

Madras HC17 Jul 2019WP/20075/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature of Madras dismissed a writ petition filed by M/s. Capgemini India Private Limited seeking to quash a Customs Circular and restrain duty levies. The petition was dismissed for default as the petitioner failed to make any appearance.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed for default due to non-appearance of the petitioner. Connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

M/S.Capgemini India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India — Customs and Excise | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 17.07.2019

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH

¶5

W.P.No.20075 of 2008 and M.P.Nos.2 & 3 of 2008

¶6

M/s. Capgemini India Private Limited, Plot No.TP 4/1, Fourth Avenue, Techno Park SEZ, Mahindra World City, Chengalpet, Kancheepuram – 603002. ...Petitioner Vs

¶7

Union of India, Represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), North Block, New Delhi.

¶8

The Director, Department of Commerce, SEZ Section, Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi, Represented by the Director.

¶9

The Development Commissioner, Madras Export Processing Zone, Tambaram, Chennai.

¶10

The Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Mahindra World City SEZ, MEPZ Special Economic Zone, Chennai. ...Respondents

¶11

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the Circular bearing F.No.6/2/2008 – SEZ (Pt) dated 30.06.2008 issued by the 2^nd respondent and quash the same and consequently forbear the respondents herein their men and agents from levying duties of customs being export duties on goods (as referred to in the above Circular dated 30.06.2008) removed from any place in India (outside a Special Economic Zone) to a Special Economic Zone inside India insofar as the petitioner is concerned. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶12

For Petitioner : No appearance

¶13

For Respondents : Mr.J.Madanagopal Rao Senior Central Government Standing Counsel

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

When the matter was listed on 26.06.2019, there was no representation for the petitioner. Hence, the matter came to be listed today, under the caption 'for dismissal'. Even today, there is no representation for the petitioner. Hence, the present Writ Petition is dismissed for default. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶16

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶17

//True Copy//

¶18

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶19

sni

¶20

¶21

1.The Secretary, Union of India, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue),

¶22

North Block,

¶23

New Delhi.

¶24

The Director, Department of Commerce, SEZ Section,

¶25

Ministry of Commerce & Industry,

¶26

Udyog Bhawan,

¶27

New Delhi,

¶28

The Development Commissioner, Madras Export Processing Zone, Tambaram, Chennai.

¶29

The Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Mahindra World City SEZ,

¶30

MEPZ Special Economic Zone, Chennai.

¶31

W.P.No.20075 of 2008

¶32

¶33

M.P.Nos.2 & 3 of 2008

¶34

A.SK(22/08/2019)

¶35

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M/S.Capgemini India Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Capgemini India Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd, Vs the Secretary to Government

The Madras Aluminum Company Vs the Assistant Commissioner

R.Subramanian Vs the State of Tamilnadu

M/S.Hyundai Motor India Ltd, Vs the Department of Reenue

Erode District Cooperative Vs Union of India

Venkatachalam Vs the District Collector