9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. challenging rejection of application under Section 245(2) Cr. P.C. 2. Interpretation of circulars issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs regarding prosecution for evasion of excise duty. 3. Binding nature of circulars issued by superior authorities to subordinate officers. 4. Compliance with guidelines issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs. Detailed Analysis: 1. The petitioner, the Managing Director of a company engaged in marble slab manufacturing, filed a petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. challenging the rejection of his application under Section 245(2) Cr. P.C. by the Special Judicial Magistrate. The petitioner argued that prosecution for evasion of excise duty below Rs. 10,000 should not have been launched against him based on circulars issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs. The Magistrate had taken cognizance of the offenses against the petitioner, ruling that the circulars were not binding on the court, leading to the challenge in the High Court. 2. The petitioner contended that circulars issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs were binding on the officers of the Excise and Customs Department. The circulars provided guidelines on launching prosecutions for evasion of excise duty, setting a monetary limit of Rs. 10,000 below which prosecution should not be ordinarily initiated. The Supreme Court decision in the case of K.P. Verghees was cited to support the argument that such circulars have binding force on the concerned authorities. The Assistant Collector had issued an order against the petitioner for evading excise duty below Rs. 10,000, which should have prevented the prosecution based on the circulars. 3. The High Court emphasized the binding nature of circulars issued by superior authorities to subordinate officers, particularly in matters related to tax or duty levies. Referring to the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of K.P. Verghees, the High Court highlighted that circulars issued under statutory powers are binding on officers employed in the execution of the statute, even if they deviate from the provisions of the Act. In the present case, the circulars from the Central Board of Excise and Customs prohibited prosecution for evasion of duty below Rs. 10,000, aiming to avoid fruitless litigation and conserve resources. 4. The High Court concluded that the continuation of the prosecution against the petitioner, despite the evasion amount being below Rs. 10,000 as per the circulars, amounted to an abuse of the court's process. The court quashed the proceedings against the petitioner and directed the complaint by the Superintendent of the Central Board of Excise and Customs Department to be dropped. The judgment highlighted the importance of compliance with guidelines and circulars issued by superior authorities for effective administration and fair treatment of subjects under the law.
|
