LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Application for substitution of name be considered

Raj Kumar Makkad ,
  20 April 2010       Share Bookmark

Court :
Bombay High Court
Brief :
Customs-Principles of Natural justice-Amendment of consignee's name in IGM-Section 30 of Chapter VI of the Customs Act-Petitioner applied to Customs Authorities to seek Amendment to the IGM so as to substitute his name as consignee in place of notified parties-Said application was rejected clarifying that no request for amendment of consignee's name in the IGM shall be entertained if consignee first named has already filed the bill of entry and has neither withdrawn the same nor given NOC for the amendment in terms of Public Notice No. 2/1010
Citation :
Rakesh Dhir v. Union of India and Ors. (Decided on 15.03.2010) MANU/MH/0232/2010
Held, proper Authority notwithstanding said public notice is required to consider the prayer of the petitioner on its own merits under Sub-section 3 of Section 30 of the Customs Act, by a reasoned order hearing all parties following principles of Natural justice. Whenever there is a failure to exercise discretion under discretionary power conferred by the statute, then, it is permissible for the Court to take note of such inaction and give a direction to consider the case, ratio of Judgment in Indian Railway Construction Co. Ltd. v. Ajay Kumar. Hence, proper officer has failed to exercise statutory discretion on well recognised judicial parameters. Impugned Order refusing to grant Amendment to the IGM set aside. Matter restored back to the Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Import Noting) with direction to consider the same afresh.

 
"Loved reading this piece by Raj Kumar Makkad?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"



Published in Corporate Law
Views : 2055




Comments