Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1986 (6) TMI 171

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... stigation Branch of the Customs Department inspected the licensed private bonded warehouse of M/s. Maschmejer Aromatics India Limited, GST Road, Madras and found a considerable quantity by way of shortfall in the warehoused goods in the bonded store room. One Thiruvengadam was found to be in the possession of key of Customs lock of one warehouse and he gave a statement before the authorities that the imported raw materials were bonded in the private bonded warehouse, licensed by the Customs Department and whenever materials were required, the materials would be taken delivery from the warehouse and the keys of the warehouse were with one Sheriff, the Secretary of the Company. The appellant was the Managing Director of the Company till 16.9. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rged that either as a Managing Director or as a Chief Executive, it will be virtually impossible for a person like the appellant to be personally supervising each and every activity in the company and the liability being penal in nature, it is for the Department to establish by acceptable legal evidence that the appellant was guilty of commission or omission of guilty of abetment in the removal of goods from the customs bonded warehouse in contravention of law. The learned counsel also assailed the finding against the appellant under the impugned order contending that Shri Sheriff, the Secretary of the Company has been exonerated of a similar charge under the impugned order on similar evidence on the ground that he was implicated only by on .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ible for removal of goods from the bonded warehouse in contravention of law. The learned SDR further urged that even though Rahimatullah has retracted his statement, reliance could be placed on the same but fairly conceded that there is not enough of corroboration for the same. The learned SDR also did not dispute seriously the plea of the appellant that different standards has been adopted so far as the appellant is concerned and though Shri Sheriff, the Secretary of the Company has been exonerated on the ground that his implication by Thiruvengadam has not been corroborated by any other evidence, the appellant has been visited with the penalty presumably because he was the Managing Director originally and later Chief Executive of the Comp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... vealed that the Board of Directors of the Company knew about the removal of non-duty paid raw materials from the bonded warehouse and the raw material so removed were eventually used only for the manufacture of Company s products. If the Board of Directors, who actually control the Company knew about the clandestine removal and derive the advantage therefrom and no penal action has been taken against them on the ground that they were not privy to the illegal act of clandestine removal of raw materials, the appellant herein who was the Managing Director till 16.9.1984 and Chief Executive, thereafter cannot be singled out for penal proceedings particularly when there is no evidence at all even remotely connecting that he ever had any pecuniar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e keys were received from Shri Sheriff through Shri Rahimatullah. This statement is not corroboration by any other evidence like admission of the same by Shri Rahimatullah etc. In such circumstances, any penal action taken against Shri Sheriff may not be sustainable in law. We feel if the same reasoning had been adopted by the adjudicating authority against the appellant, the appellant should have been exonerated of the charge. No doubt, we are convinced that the circumstances appearing in evidence as against the appellant engender a grave suspicion in our mind. As suspicion however grave it might, cannot take the place of proof, we are constrained to hold that the charge against the appellant has not been brought home by the evidence av .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates