SHAH AND CO Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pursuant to her earlier undertaking given to this court on 11th March, 1988, learned Advocate Miss Reshma Ruparel has since filed her appearance for the petitioners in all these petitioner and the same has been taken on record. M/s. Kanatwala & Co. Advocate and solicitors, are, therefore, as earlier indicate, now discharged as Advocates for the petitioners.

(2.) Pursuant to court's suo notice, proceeding how come up for considering the affidavit of advocate Nitin Kantawala filed to show that there is as against him, no case for criminal contempt, before that, however, a brief resume of the facts and circumstance may be useful.

(3.) The main relief claimed in these petitioners relates to refund of duty paid. At the hearing the reasoning had contended that the petitioners had filed three writ petitioners and, pursuant to orders thereon, obtained refund : that even so the petitioners filed the present petitioners claiming refund once again of those very amounts : Whereas earlier refund was founded on bills of entries cash numbers, claim in the present petitions was on bills of entries themselves, thus making it difficult to co-relate the two claims : and that the petitioners has also obtained refund from customs in favour of various other concerns by having exhibits to petitioners, on which refund orders were made, substituted to included other claims.