News Update

GST - Neither SCN nor the order spell out the reasons for retrospective cancellation of registration, hence cannot be sustained: HCGST - Non-application of mind - If reply was unsatisfactory, details could have been sought - Record does not reflect that such exercise was done - Matter remitted: HCGST - Merely because a taxpayer has not filed returns for some period does not mean that registration is required to be cancelled with retrospective date also covering the period when returns were filed and taxpayer was compliant: HCGST - Petitioner's reply, although terse, is not taken into account while passing assessment orders - Petitioner put on terms, another opportunity provided: HCUnveil One Nation; One Debt Code; One Compliance Rule for Centre & StatesChina moves WTO against US tax subsidies for EVs & renewable energyMore on non-doms - The UK Spring Budget 2024 (See TII Edit)Notorious history-sheeter Mukhtar Ansari succumbs to cardiac arrest in UP jailTraining Program for Cambodian civil servants commences at MussoorieNY imposes USD 15 congestion taxCBIC revises tariff value of edible oils, gold & silver45 killed as bus races into ravine in South AfricaCBIC directs all Customs offices to remain open on Saturday & SundayBankman-Fried jailed for 25 yrs in FTX scamI-T- Once the citizen deposits the tax upon coming to know of his liability, it cannot be said that he has deliberately or willfully evaded the depositing of tax and interest in terms of Section 234A can be waived: HCHouthis attack continues in Red Sea; US military shoots down 4 dronesI-T- Secured creditor has priority charge over secured asset, over claims of I-T Department & other Departments; any excess amount recovered by Secured Creditor from auction of secured asset, over & above the dues payable to it, are to be remitted to the Departments: HCFederal Govt hands out USD 60 mn to rebuild collapsed bridge in BaltimoreI-T - Receipts of sale of scrap being part & parcel of activity and being proximate thereto would also be within ambit of gains derived from industrial undertaking for purpose of computing deduction u/s 80-IB: HCCanadian School Boards sue social media titans for 4 bn Canadian dollar in damagesI-T - Once assssee on year of reversal has paid taxes on excess provision and similar feature appeared in earlier years and assesee had payments for liquidated damages on delay of deliverables, no adverse inference can be drawn: HCFormer IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt jailed for 20 yrs for planting drugs to frame lawyerST - Software development service & IT-enabled service provided by assessee was exempt from tax during relevant period, by virtue of CBEC's Notification & Circular; demands raised for such period not sustainable: CESTATUN says Households waste across world is now at least one billion meals a dayCus - Order rejecting exporter's request for conversion of Shipping Bills on grounds that the same has been made by exporter beyond period of three months from date of Let Export Order in terms of CBEC Circular No. 36/2010-Cus : CESTATIndia, China hold fresh dialogue for complete disengagement on Western borders: MEACus - No Cess is payable when Basic Customs Duty is found to be Nil: CESTATThakur says India is prepared for 2036 OlympicsCX - As per settled law, a right acquired as result of a statutory provision, cannot be taken away retrospectively unless said statutory provision so provides or by necessary implication has such effect: CESTAT
 
Cus - Criminal prosecution against Customs officer cannot be continued once Revenue appeal before HC against CESTAT order is withdrawn citing litigation policy: High Court

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, MAR 16, 2018: FACTS in brief are that on 09.02.2001, pursuant to seizure of 200 gold bars of foreign origin valued at Rs.1,02,80,000/- from the possession of Abdul Sathar, a passenger who had arrived by Emirates flight No. EK-500 from Dubai and intercepted when he was about to leave the airport through the green channel, DRI initiated investigation. Abdul Sattar admitted to smuggling gold bars of foreign origin in complicity with several other persons including two officers of Customs.

Proceedings were initiated against various noticees and an order came to be passed by the adjudicating authority.

In appeal before the Tribunal, filed in the year 2002 , noticees John Barretto, Santosh Talpade (Customs officers), Abdul Sattar and others submitted that the impugned order has been passed ex-parte without giving opportunity of hearing; that the department has not supplied the relied upon documents despite repeated requests; that in view of the facts of the case, necessary stay may be granted and the matter may be remanded to the original authority for de novo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard and after supplying the relied upon documents so that they can defend themselves effectively.

The Tribunal by its order Order No. 382-395/2003-WZB/C-III dated 05 March 2003 was satisfied that there was a clear cut case of violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, after waiving the pre-deposit, the impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for de novo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard and after furnishing relied upon documents to the appellants and to pass a fresh speaking order.

In denovo proveedings, the Commissioner of Customs (Adj) Mumbai vide order CAO No. 85/2008/CAC/CC/KS dated 31.03.2008 confiscated the seized gold under Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962 and imposed penalties on various persons found to have been involved in smuggling or abetting the smuggling under Section 112(a) & (b) of the Act. A penalty of Rs. 5.00 lakhs was imposed on Arif Shaikh. However, proposal to penalize Santosh Talpade was dropped.

Revenue went in appeal before the CESTAT challenging the dropping of penalty against Santosh Talpade and Arif Shaikh too filed an appeal against imposition of penalty.

The CESTAT by its order A/309-310/2010-WZB/C-II/CSTB dated 28 January 2010 while rejecting the appeal of the Revenue observed -

"…As regards the mahazar used as evidence against Shri Talapde, the allegations against the respondent stand established if this mahazar is accepted as evidence. We find that the mahazar is not a voluntary account of any transaction rendered by the respondent or the passenger. Mahazar is usually an account of a static scene or an inventory of things found on search in presence of witnesses, recorded by officers, to be used in a judicial or quasi judicial proceeding. It is not a legal device that can validate depositions as being voluntary. We conclude that the proceedings were conducted in such a manner that the respondent was under compulsion to testify whatever the investigating agency desired. We find that a statement obtained in a mahazar proceeding cannot be a voluntary one given on one's freewill. Especially if the same has been retracted. All the statements recorded from the respondent have to be seen in the light of the retraction and these have to be proved with further evidence.

13. We reject the statements as evidence being not voluntary and true. As held by the Apex Court in the Pavunny case, rule of prudence and practice requires that a Court seeks corroboration of the retracted confession from other evidence. In the instant case the passenger who incriminated the respondent did not appear before the authorities. Other major party to the transactions Shri. John Baretto did not also participate in the proceedings. No corroboratory evidence of the respondent's involvement was gathered by the revenue. In the circumstances, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected."

The appeal of Arif Shaikh was allowed on the ground that there is no finding of involvement of the appellant in the offending transactions in the impugned order.

Be that as it may, against this order,in the matter of Santosh Talpade, the Revenue filed an appeal (Customs Appeal No. 6 of 2011) before the Bombay High Court.

Incidentally, in view of the litigation policy, Revenue withdrew the appeal against the present petitioner on 10/04/2017 and as a consequence there are no departmental proceedings under the Customs Act against the petitioner as on date.

Nonetheless, the parallel criminal proceedings, initiated against the petitioner seeking his prosecution based on the departmental proceedings,continued.

In the aforesaid background, the petitioner Santosh Talpade would urge before the High Court that in absence of any departmental proceedings, prosecution of the present petitioner cannot be continued. Support is drawn from the Judgment of the Apex Court in the matter of Radheshyam Kejriwala Vs. State of W.B. - 2011-TIOL-19-SC-FEMA , particularly findings recorded in paragraph nos. 25, 26, 29 to 31, 39 & 47.Inasmuch as it is submitted that criminal prosecution against the petitioner cannot be continued.

The counsel for the Revenue submitted that the Customs Appeal was withdrawn by the Revenue only because there was a policy of the Union of India not to proceed ahead with such appeals; that independent of the departmental proceedings, prosecution can be justified.

The High Court inter alia observed -

+ Fact remains that criminal prosecution of the petitioner is based on some departmental proceedings which were formed to be basis for taking out Customs Appeal before the Division Bench of this Court which already stood withdrawn upon the request of the Revenue as is apparent from the order dated 10/04/2017.

+ Once the basis for such prosecution being departmental proceedings have already come to an end in favour of the petitioner and against Revenue, the issue, in my opinion is squarely governed by the Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Radheshyam Kejriwal [Cited supra].

+ I hardly notice any substance in the submissions made by the counsel for the respondent Revenue that inspite of the departmental proceedings having come to an end finally against the petitioner, still criminal prosecution against him under the Customs Act will continue.

In fine, the prosecution initiated against the petitioner in Criminal Complaint no. 43/S/2013 pending on the file of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Esplanade, Mumbai was quashed and set aside with consequential reliefs.

(See 2018-TIOL-459-HC-MUM-CUS)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri Shailendra Kumar, Trustee, TIOL Trust, giving welcome speech at TIOL Awards 2023




Shri M C Joshi, Former Chairman, CBDT




Address by Shri Buggana Rajendranath, Hon'ble Finance Minister of Andhra Pradesh at TIOL Awards 2023