UDIT TEXTILES Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (EXPORT)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition was heard alongwith WP(C) 3598/2015, titled : M/s. Santosh Handloom Vs. The Commissioner of Customs (Import) and Ors. A detailed counter affidavit was filed by the respondent in the said writ petition. The arguments in the said writ petition [i.e. WP(C) 3598/2015] and in the captioned petition were common on the issue of law raised therein; the dates and events not being in dispute.

(2.) It is a common ground that the facts obtaining in the instant case are largely similar to those which are found in Santosh Handloom case [i.e. WP(C) 3598/2015]. For the sake of greater clarity, I only set out, the crucial facts obtaining in the present case, which are as follows :-

(3.) Therefore, in the aforesaid circumstances, both the SCN dated 23.01.2015 and the adjudication order dated 23.01.2015, will suffer the same fate. The aforementioned SCN and the adjudication order are quashed. Resultantly, the respondent will have to return the goods seized, to the petitioner. However, as indicated in the Santosh Handloom case [i.e. WP(C) 3598/2015], the proceedings qua confiscation can continue. [See para 17 of the judgment of even date, passed in the case of Santosh Handloom {i.e. WP(C) 3598/2015}]