- (1.) This appeal has preferred by the Union of India against the judgment of a learned Single Judge, the relevant portion of which is extracted below: Until the disposal of the writ the impugned order of the Collector of Customs dated 30.1.95 (pages 19 to 32 of the writ petition) shall be stayed in its operation and in all its other effect in so far as the writ Petitioner Pawan Kumar Didwania is concerned. Until the disposal of the writ the said order shall be treated to be non est as against Pawan Kumar Didwania, the writ Petitioner.
(2.) Another appeal has been filed relating to this very matter filed by Anil Kumar Didwania (Anil Kumar Didwania v/s. Collector of Customs and Ors.) in which also show -cause notice had been issued by the Collector of Customs to the following effect: In view of the above M/s. Asia Mercantile Corporation of 202, Kundan Bhavan, Azadpur Commercial Complex, Delhi -52, Shri Anil Kumar Didwania, Vinod Kr. Didwania and Pawan Kumar Didwania are hereby called upon to explain the matter in writing and to show cause - (i) Why the differential duty of Rs. 1,53,09,118 should not be recovered from them, under Sec. 28 of the Customs Act, 1962, (ii) why appropriate fine in lieu of confiscation should not be recovered from them under Sec. 125 of the Customs Act, 1962, (iii) why penal -action should not be taken against them under Sec. 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962.
(3.) In reply to the, show cause notice issued to Pawan Kumar Didwania on the same ground as of Anil Kumar Didwania, he alleged that the proceedings taken against him were mala fide and in breach of the principles of natural justice. We have disallowed that appeal by a different judgment given today. Appeal had been preferred by Anil Kumar. Didwania on the ground that the objections had no substance at all.;