Monday, 13, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

M/S. Pennar Industries Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs And ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2532 Tel

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 2532 Tel
Judgement Date : 20 September, 2023

Telangana High Court
M/S. Pennar Industries Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs And ... on 20 September, 2023
Bench: P.Sam Koshy, Laxmi Narayana Alishetty
           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHY
                            AND
     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
                             C.E.A.No.116 of 2006
ORDER:(per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.SAM KOSHY)

          Heard Mr. S. Ravi, learned counsel for the appellant and

Mr. Dominic Fernandez, learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC

appearing for respondent.

2. The instant appeal has been filed assailing the order dated

09.05.2006 passed in Customs/100/2005 by the learned

Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal

Bench (CESTAT), FKCCI-WTC Building, K.G.Road, Bangalore

(briefly referred to as "the Tribunal"), received by the appellant on

25.05.2006.

3. The point of issue in the present appeal is whether notice

under Section 72(2) of Customs Act, 1962 was required to be

issued, as petitioner had failed to clear the goods within the

prescribed period of time.

4. Learned counsel for the parties accepted the legal position of

the entire issue getting settled by the judgment of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of Kesoram Rayon Vs. Collector of

Customs, Calcutta 1, whereby, it has been held that subsequent to

the amendment that has been brought to Section 59 (1)(b), there

1996 (86) ELT 464 (SC)

PSK,J & LNA,J CEA.No.116 of 2006

was no further requirement for issuance of any notice and that it

was incumbent upon the assessee as regards payment with

interest under Section 61(2) from the date it fell due.

5. Given the aforesaid contention by the learned counsel on

either side, we are of the considered opinion that no strong case

has been made out by the appellant calling for an interference with

the impugned order, more particularly, for the reason that the

matter stands covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in the case of Kesoram Rayon (Supra).

6. The Appeal thus fails and is accordingly rejected. There

shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand

closed.

__________________ P. SAM KOSHY, J

________________________________ LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J Date: 20.09.2023 Pvt

PSK,J & LNA,J CEA.No.116 of 2006

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. SAM KOSHY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

C.E.A.No.116 of 2006

Date: 20.09.2023 Pvt

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Media

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter