OMKAR EXPORTS Vs. UNION OF INDIA
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MESSRS OMKAR EXPORTS
UNION OF INDIA
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) CONSIDERING scope of controversy the petition is taken up for final hearing and disposal. RULE. Learned counsel for the respondents is directed to waive service.
(2.) THE petitioner has preferred this petition praying for following reliefs:
"13. In the above premises, the petitioners most respectfully pray as under:-That Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, quashing and setting aside decision of the second respondent conveyed to the petitioners vide letter F. No. V/misc-4/2003-R dated 29. 2. 2008 (Annexure-'h') thereby directing the second respondent to forthwith return amount of Rs. 7. 50 lakhs to the petitioners; that Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, directing respondent No. 2 to pay compensation by way of interest at the rate of 12% p. a. on the amount of Rs. 7. 50 lakhs for the period from August-October, 2001 till actual restitution of this amount, or for the period that may be deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court; pending hearing and final disposal of the present petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the respondents, their servants and agents to forthwith return the amount of Rs. 7. 50 lakhs to the petitioners with interest that may be deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court; an ex-parte ad-interim relief in terms of Para 13 (C) above may kindly be granted; any other further relief that may be deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also please be granted. "
(3.) THE facts, which are not in dispute, are that on 10. 08. 2001 officers of the Directorate General of Central Excise Intelligence, Vadodara visited premises of " (i) M/s. Gopi Synthetics, Ahmedabad; (ii) M/s. Omkar Exports (the petitioner herein) and (iii) M/s. Omkar Textile Limited for making certain inquiries. It appears that the said authority prima facie opined that the petitioner had made a wrong claim for duty drawback amounting to Rs. 25,57,386/ -. It is the say of the petitioner that a sum of Rs. 7,50,000/- was recovered by the officers of the said authority for the period between 18. 06. 2001 to 15. 09. 2001 towards such a claim of duty drawback. The case of the respondent authority is that it was the petitioner who had accepted having made a wrong claim and voluntarily deposited the amount of Rs. 7,50,000/ -.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.