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

2007 (4) TMI 271

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aw materials, namely, LSICs, ICs connectors, disc drives CBT etc. for manufacturing of computers and computer peripheral devices at Air Cargo Unit, New Delhi claiming concessional rate of duties under various notifications issued from time to time under Customs Tariff Act, particularly 67/85 and 279/84. The importers are required to obtain certificates from the Government agencies such as Department of Electronics and other departments which indicate the details of items to be imported and numbers/quantity thereof. It is alleged that in the year 1985-86, the accused company extrapolated/manipulated number of items to be imported as well as added items which did not qualify for concessions and/or had not been allowed by the Department of Ele .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... der was set aside, the complaint should be dismissed. This application is dismissed by the learned ACMM vide order dated 24-4-2004, inter alia, holding that the adjudication proceedings and the criminal proceedings are different and merely because the adjudication proceedings are decided in favour of the petitioner, it would not automatically follow that the criminal complaint is to be dismissed. The learned ACMM has referred to the judgments of the Supreme Court in the case of Asst. Collector of Customs v. L.R. Malwani, 1999 (110) E.L.T. 317 (SC); and that of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in K. Neelakantha Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 2000 (122) E.L.T. 7, and quoting from these two judgments he observed as under :- 'From the aforesaid .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mstances, can be treated as double jeopardy as they are not in the nature of 'prosecution'. (c) In case adjudication proceedings are decided against a person who is facing prosecution as well and the Tribunal has also upheld the findings of the adjudicators/assessing authority, that would have no bearing on the criminal proceedings and the criminal proceedings are to be determined on its own merits in accordance with law, uninhibited by the findings of the Tribunal. It is because of the reason that insofar as criminal action is concerned, it has to be proved as per the strict standards fixed for criminal cases before the criminal court by producing necessary evidence. (d) In case of converse situation, namely, where the ac .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... departmental proceedings as well as criminal complaint are identical and the exoneration of the concerned person in the departmental proceedings is on merits holding that there is no contravention of the provisions of any Act. 5.It is now to be seen as to whether the petitioner has made out a case of his discharge applying the principles of law enunciated above. For this purpose, one has to scan through the judgment of the Appellate Tribunal to find out the reasons which prevailed with the Tribunal to allow the appeal against the adjudication order. 6.Order dated 7-1-1997 of the Appellate Tribunal would reveal that show-cause notices issued to the company were challenged on the ground that these notices could have been issued only by th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tes the details of items to be imported and numbers thereof. The accused company extrapolated the number of items to be imported as well as added items which did not qualify for concessions or had not been allowed by the DOE. Invoices were forged to undervalue the price of items. I have also gone through the statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act. Accused No. 5 in his statement has inter alia stated that he is the Director of M/s. Usha Rectifiers Ltd. And M/s. Usha Micro Process Controls Ltd. He has further stated that the same people as in M/s. Usha Micro Process Controls Ltd. were looking after the affairs of M/s. Alien Woodroffe Ltd. He has admitted the discrepancies and differences in the copies of certificates issued .....

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