2006 (6) TMI 125 - HC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Prosecution for filing false declarations regarding turnover.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a proprietor of a small scale industry, was accused of fraudulently furnishing declarations to evade excise duty on the turnover of the factory. The Central Excise Law required accurate reporting of goods produced and cleared annually. The accused allegedly suppressed actual turnover to remain within exempted limits. The charge sheet included a charge under Section 420 related to the alleged false declarations.

After investigation, the police filed a charge sheet, and the case was numbered as C.C. No. 117 of 1998. The petitioner approached the High Court seeking to quash the proceedings, arguing that the turnover did not exceed exempted limits, thus not warranting prosecution. The Central Excise Department sought a substantial amount towards excise duty, but the Collector's inquiry found the declarations filed by the petitioner were verified and in order. The Collector's order stated that the party cannot be blamed for mis-declaration as the department was aware of the nature of the manufacture.

The petitioner's counsel highlighted that no appeal was made against the Collector's order, making it final. The prosecution focused on the alleged false declarations. The counsel argued that since the Collector had already determined the declarations were not false, prosecuting the petitioner for the same was unjustified. The High Court concurred, stating that with the Collector's order confirming the accuracy of the declarations, there was no basis to continue the prosecution. Consequently, the High Court allowed the Criminal Petition, quashing the prosecution against the petitioner.