Kolkata Court July 1996 Judgments

Bombay Art Jewellers Vs. Collector of Cus. (Preventive)

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: 1998(98)ELT61(Cal)

Umesh Chandra Banerjee, J.1. There will be an order in terms of prayer (a) of the petition.2. Normally the Appellant Court ought not to interfere with the user of discretion of the learned Trial Judge unless the same can be termed to be otherwise perverse or not in accordance with the known principles of law. In order to assess the situation, however, it is a duty incumbent on the Appellate Court to apprise itself on the factual context and see for itself whether in fact such an exercise of discretion can be termed to be in accordance with law. At this juncture, however, adverting to the contextual facts, it appears that 50 Kgs. of gold was imported by MMTC and subsequently was made over to the appellant-petitioner herein. Obviously MMTC was otherwise satisfied as to the credibility of the appellant as otherwise MMTC, a Government organisation being an authority within the meaning of Article 12 would not have asked for a bank guarantee covering the value of 30 Kgs. of gold only and for...