TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 1064X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is surprising that the Directorate and whole of it does not have time to proceed against those indulging in fraud on the public. A justification of this nature comes promptly only when parties like the petitioner complain of a freezing or attachment of their bank accounts and refusal to release them even if bona fides are shown. This is not a case of an admitted fraud or a liability which is undisputed. Once there are allegations of fraud the Revenue has a larger responsibility and duty to the public. It cannot refuse to take all steps and rest only on freezing of bank accounts of the alleged defaulters. That such an act and which is to be found traceable to different powers and of the nature conferred in the Customs Act, 1962, will not permit the respondents to deprive parties like the petitioner of their source of livelihood. They cannot stop their business by continued freezing of their bank accounts. It is further very clear and requires no reiteration that what is prohibited directly cannot be achieved indirectly or in an oblique manner. A refusal to carry out a duty in accordance with law cannot be justified by such a continued attachment and freezing of the bank accoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claimed, the consignments are subjected to examination as per the Rules fixed by the department. The norms are also referred in paragraph 4.4, including appraisal of the consignment by the officers. The volume of exports and the claim of duty drawback would be decided, according to the petitioner, in the hierarchy of the appraisal. 4. The petitioner points out that the entire procedure would not be known to the petitioner had he not dealt with the department from time to time in export of consignments and claimed drawback. The petitioner claims that as far as the present issue raised in the petition is concerned, the subject consignments were physically examined and found to be satisfactory. The exports were permitted and the export incentives were sanctioned. However, on the basis of certain intelligence received by the officers of the respondents, investigations were initiated into the exports made by certain other exporters who, according to the respondents, did not export any goods, but have claimed duty drawback on these goods. It is in these circumstances that the search was carried out in the premises of one Mr. Suhail Ansari. It is stated that the documents recovered sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k account should be frozen and endlessly. The petitioner was pressurized to make further payments and that is how the petitioner, relying upon certain judgments, pointed out by a letter of 28th January, 2016, followed by another one dated 15th February, 2016, that the bank account be released. 8. The respondents, on the other hand, informed the petitioner in writing on 25th February, 2016, that he has failed to appear before them by giving some reason or the other. This was denied by the petitioner and he stated that had he not appeared there would have been no question of some amount being recovered. 9. It is in these circumstances that the petitioner has knocked the doors of this Court and Mr. Shah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, relying upon series of judgments of this Court and the final one rendered by a Division Bench to which one of us (S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.) was a party, in the case of Rajendra Vithal Shinde vs. Union of India Anr., Writ Petition No.22728 of 2015, decided on 22nd December, 2015, permits that attachment of movable and immovable property in the manner done is impermissible. 10. On the other hand, Mr. Jetly learned counsel appearing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted that the nature of documents, if any, required be kindly intimated so that the same can be produced before the Special Investigating Officer. 13. Then, the petitioner does not dispute that on 11th September, 2015, he addressed a letter to the Branch Manager of HDFC Bank Limited and informed that his account has been frozen by the DRI, Mumbai Zonal Unit in connection with on-going investigation into the exports. In order to prove his bona fides, he had deposited an amount in Government exchequer. That is how the entire credit in the account which has been specifically described in this letter should be made over by a demand draft in the name of the respondents. Thereafter, the intimation of export proceeds being received in the HDFC Account be also furnished to the DRI. 14. Then the petitioner annexes a copy of the letter addressed by the DRI to the Branch Manager of the HDFC Bank Limited at page 30 of the paper-book. This letter reads as under : DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE Mumbai Zonal Unit, UTI Building, 13, Vithaldas Thakersey Marg, New Marine Lines, Mumbai 400 020 F.No.DRI/MZU/D/Int-31/2015 11th September, 2016 To The Branch Manag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aud. The fact that the petitioner has admitted that there was some liability but the circumstances in which he has paid the sum of ₹ 16,62,794.18 has been duly explained by him. He terms the payment as ad-hoc and when he states that this is only to cooperate in the investigation that the petitioner has made this payment, then, we do not find any justification for the continued action. In a letter addressed on 4th January, 2016, to the Senior Intelligence Officer, copy of which is at page 34 of the paper-book, the petitioner specifically complains that the investigation started in the month of September, 2014. He has appeared and has given evidence. He was asked to submit copies of all shipping bills and related export documents. They have been submitted. He claims that no wrong has been committed by him in relation to the exports nor any undue benefit is availed of, still a total amount of ₹ 25,48,573/- being deposited, he should be allowed to continue his business activities. He claims that he is a exporter in imitation jewellery for past several years. He has also set out as to how he has throughout acted bona fide. He has also pointed out that there are documents whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venty Four Lakhs Only). 18. We have found from a reading of the above paragraph that the petitioner is attributed a clear admission of the guilt. Once there is an admission of guilt, according to the Revenue, then, it is enough justification for their act is the submission of Mr. Jetly. Far from reading any admission of guilt, what we do in order to completely reject the submissions of Mr. Jetly is a reading of the documents annexed to the petition as also the above reproduced paragraph in the affidavit-in-reply as a whole. We cannot pick and choose certain sentences or portions thereof. We are not denying to the Revenue an opportunity of investigating or unearthing huge fraud. We are also not denying them their powers, but surely if drastic powers have to be exercised by public bodies, they must be exercised reasonably and fairly. We fail to understand if a huge and systematic fraud is alleged and perpetrated not only on the Revenue but on the public as a whole resulting in a voluntary deposit from the petitioner, then, why the investigations could not be concluded nor a show cause notice issued nor any steps taken till date. When such petitions are filed, it is our experien ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
