NANDALAL RANDER Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There shall be an order in terms of prayer (a) of the application.

(2.) On 30th March 1998 learned Counsel for the appellant, Sri Poddar, mentioned in the morning regarding the appeal filed by his client Nandalal Rander, even though tender number has not been allotted to the application and submitted that considering the urgency in the matter he had approached the Bench presided over by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice and the Hon'ble Chief Justice has assigned this appeal along with the stay application to this Bench for disposal. Therefore, without having any tender number he mentioned the matter before us with a prayer that the matter be heard in view of the urgency of the situation and also in view of the fact that his client has disclosed more than one crore of rupees under the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme, the amount which his client has paid to the Customs Department and unless the amount is refunded to the appellant, his client cannot pay the tax and avail of the benefits and amenities provided under the Voluntary Disclosure Scheme. He was allowed to argue on the stay application. Both counsel for the appellant and the respondents also agree that the appeal be heard along with the stay application finally. By consent of the parties, the appeal be treated on the day's list and stands disposed of along with the stay application.

(3.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties on the stay application as well as on appeal.