Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + SC Central Excise - 1972 (8) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1972 (8) TMI 44 - SC - Central ExciseWhether prosecution in case was barred by the rule of limitation in Section 40 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944? Held that:- The complaint against respondents was that they wanted to evade payment of duty. Evasion was by using cut and torn banderols. Books of accounts were not correctly maintained. There was shortage of banderol in stock. Unbanderolled matches were found. These are all infraction of the provisions in respect of things done or ordered to be done under the Act. The positive aspect of omission in the present case is evasion of payment of duty. The provisions of the Act require proper affixing of banderols. Cut or torn banderols were used. Unbanderolled match boxes were found. These provisions about use of banderols are for collection and payment of excise duty. The respondents did not pay the lawful dues which are acts to be done or ordered to be done under the Act.The High Court was right in its conclusion that the prosecution was barred by the provisions of section 40 of the Act. Appeal dismissed.
|