9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 519X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gar for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution has been initiated in the following set of circumstances. 2. The applicants are the partners of a partnership concern, namely, Paglam Chicori Suppliers, engaged in the business of selling of Chicory roots (tuber) and duly registered under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 bearing Registration No.69310281. It was the business of the partnership firm to purchase chicory directly from the farmers as agricultural crops and to sell it outside the State of Gujarat without carrying out any process of cutting and drying the roots. 3. The question was whether the chicory roots sold by the partnership firm were falling under entry No.23 of the Fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g all Sales Tax Departments in the State that chicory root would be exempted from levy of any Sales Tax. 6. It is the say of the applicants that to the shock and surprise, after a period of 22 years of the assessment order, the FIR came to be filed by the respondent No.2 for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code without explaining the gross delay and also without specifying as to why after the Apex Court's decision any amount could be recovered. 7. Learned advocate, Mr. Premal Rachh appearing for the applicants has been heard in the matter. He has urged that not only the decisions of the Apex Court would have a direct applicability, there are complete absence of any ingredients of Section 406 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9246 of 2015 respectively. 9. This Court has also heard Ms. Moxa Thakkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent State who has urged that at a relevant time since the party had not paid any amount which was directed to be paid after the assessment order the prosecution was initiated, however, after having lost in the appeal, the prosecution could not have been initiated or continued, she fairly however submitted. It is also agreed that the communication dated 28.09.2016 addressed to the applicants clearly indicates that nothing now remains to be recovered. 10. Having heard learned advocates on both the sides and also on noticing the decision rendered in case of Hindustan Lever (Supra), it is quite clear from this decision tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
