KAJAL ROY Vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With the consent and at the request of the learned counsel for the parties, we have considered this matter finally at this stage itself where, having regard to the circumstances, it does not appear necessity to call for any counter affidavit from the respondents because the matter essentially revolves around the material already available on record.

(2.) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner, said to be a dealer of betel nuts, has stated grievance that despite the order dated 05.11.2015 of this Court in WP(C) No.329 of 2014, the concerned authority has not considered the preliminary issues and the matter is sought to be taken up for final hearing without the decision of preliminary issues by the competent authority.

(3.) The petitioner has further pointed out that the Assistant Commissioner of Customs has purportedly sent a response to the letter of his counsel on 10.05.2016 (Annexure-6) and therein, the decision of preliminary issues raised is sought to be indicated but in the last, the said Assistant Commissioner has stated that the speaking order as directed by the Hon'ble Court will be issued by the competent authority.