2012 (11) TMI 446 - HC - Central Excise

Authorization for Search search after surrender of registration - proper authorisation of search dated 9.2.2011, premises of M/s. MGM Metallisers Ltd., were searched - premises of M/s. Frenylon Industries. was also searched - Held that - If such company had discontinued its manufacturing activities, there was nothing on record to suggest that despite such so-called discontinuance the registration of central excise was cancelled. In fact the petitioner agrees that there was no such cancellation of registration. If during such search, any documents, materials, or other incriminating or innocuous materials were found from such premises, nothing prevented the Excise authorities from taking note of the same. Further contention of the petitioner that premises of M/s. Frenylon Industries. was also searched without authorisation, also cannot be accepted. It is the case of Central Excise authorities that certain raw materials/finished products belonging to M/s. Frenylon Industries was found from the premises of M/s. MGM Metallisers Ltd. These are highly disputed questions of facts. We are unable to uphold merely on the basis of affidavits that the Excise authorities transgressed their authorisation and searched and seized materials or documents from outside of the premises of M/s. MGM Metallisers Ltd. From the affidavits filed by the respondents,there was considerable material to prima facie hold a belief that central excise duty evasion was being carried out by the group of companies led by M/s. MGM Metallisers Ltd. whose Director was Shri Nagindas Kapadia. In his case also, a separate search authorisation was issued - Under the circumstances in absence of any illegality pointed out to the authorisation of search and in absence of any foundation for examining allegations of personal mala fide, all the petitions must fail - Same are accordingly dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Legality of the search and seizure operations.
2. Validity of the search authorisations.
3. Allegations of mala fide actions by the Central Excise authorities.
4. The impact of the search on non-excisable entities.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Legality of the Search and Seizure Operations:
The petitioner, M/s. MGM Metallisers Ltd., claimed that the search and seizure operations conducted by the Central Excise authorities on 10.2.2011 were illegal and without jurisdiction. They argued that the search was carried out without any legal authorisation and that the company had ceased manufacturing activities long before the search. The Central Excise authorities, however, contended that they acted on reliable information suggesting large-scale evasion of duty by the petitioner and its associated entities. They conducted the search based on authorisations issued on 9.2.2011.

2. Validity of the Search Authorisations:
The petitioners questioned the validity of the search authorisations, asserting that no proper authorisation was presented at the time of the search. The Court examined the search authorisations produced by the respondents, which were issued by the Deputy Director of the Director General of Central Excise Intelligence. These authorisations empowered the officers to search the premises of M/s. MGM Metallisers Ltd. and other related entities. The Court found that the authorisations were valid and that the search was conducted within the scope of these authorisations.

3. Allegations of Mala Fide Actions by the Central Excise Authorities:
The petitioners alleged that the search operations were carried out with mala fide intentions to harass them. However, the Court noted that there were no specific allegations or evidence of personal mala fide actions against any of the Central Excise officers. The Court emphasized that no personal allegations were made in the petitions, and none of the officers were named or joined in their personal capacity. Therefore, the Court dismissed the allegations of mala fide actions, stating that there was no foundation to examine such claims.

4. The Impact of the Search on Non-Excisable Entities:
M/s. Frenylon Industries and MGM Metallisers India Pvt. Ltd. also filed petitions challenging the search operations, claiming that their premises were searched without authorisation and that they were non-excisable entities. The Court found that the search authorisations were specific to the premises of M/s. MGM Metallisers Ltd., and any materials or documents found during the search were within the scope of the authorisation. The Court held that the presence of materials related to non-excisable entities at the searched premises did not invalidate the search.

Conclusion:
The Court dismissed all the petitions, upholding the validity of the search and seizure operations conducted by the Central Excise authorities. The Court found that the authorisations for the search were valid, and there was no evidence to support the allegations of mala fide actions. The presence of materials related to non-excisable entities at the searched premises did not affect the legality of the search. The petitions were dismissed, and the notices were discharged.