Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 2342 (MAD)

Olympic Enterprises, Represented by its Proprietrix, Brijbalan Jain v. Deputy Director, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

2011-04-26

M.JAICHANDREN

body2011
Judgment :- 1. Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent. 2. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petitions, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent had submitted that no duty demand will be made against the petitioners, till final orders are passed in the adjudication proceedings. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners had submitted that the petitioners would co-operate, fully, in the adjudication process. 4. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, since, no further orders are necessary, the writ petitions stand closed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.