9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (12) TMI 150X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondent-firm were also present at that time. The paper slip and the red pocket diary recovered from the possession of A.J. Patel contained certain accounts regarding manufacture and removal of sodium silicate pertaining to the respondent-firm and on interrogation, A.J. Patel explained the nothings in the red diary and admitted that they represented clandestine removal of sodium silicate contrary to law. A.J. Patel gave a statement before the authorities on 14-4-1982 giving details about unlawful and clandestine removal of manufactured goods from the respondent-firm and explaining the various entries, figures and letters in the red pocket diary recovered from his possession. The statement recorded from A.J. Patel which was inculpatory in nature was also attested by the power agent of the respondents who also made an endorsement that what was stated in the statement was correct. J.C. Patel, father of A.J. Patel, has also attested the inculpatory statement of his . son, A.J. Patel. On 20-9-1982 the mother of A.J. Patel, N.D. Patel, who is a partner of the respondent-firm also sent a communication to the Superintendent of Central Excise, Special Anti-Evasion Squad, Madras, to the ef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s removed was much more than the figures indicated in the red pocket diary and therefore reliance should not be placed on the figures in the pocket diary. Reliance was also placed on Section 34 of the Evidence Act on behalf of the respondents to contend that when accounts kept in the regular course of business are available, no reliance could be placed on any extraneous statement from a third party like A.J. Patel. Finally, it was urged that at the worst, the evidence available on record would only throw a good deal of suspicion against the respondents and the proceedings being criminal in nature, suspicion can never take the place of proof and at any rate the respondents would be entitled to the benefit of doubt. Therefore, the representative contended that the impugned order appealed against is clearly sustainable in law. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions of the parties herein. The first and primary question that falls for consideration is whether the statement recorded from A.J. Patel which admittedly is inculpatory in nature and confessional in character is entitled to be accepted and acted upon. A perusal of the statement recorded from A.J. Patel clearly shows t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tances, the conclusion is inevitable that the statement recorded from A.J. Patel is true and voluntary and the Department is entitled to place reliance on the same. 6. The plea made on behalf of the respondents that A.J. Patel being an inexperienced youngster and stranger, totally unconnected with the respondent-firm is not competent to give any statement against the respondents is not legally tenable. A.J. Patel is not a total stranger but a son of one of the partners of the firm. A.J. Patel s father, according to the statement, was also managing the affairs of the firm. The power of attorney of the respondent, Jayaraman, has also attested the statement of A.J. Patel. In such a situation I do not find any merit in the plea of the respondents that the statement of A.J. Patel has to be discarded on the ground that he is a total stranger to the affairs of the firm and that respondents cannot be proceeded against on the basis of a statement given by A.J. Patel. 7. The plea of the respondents that the R.G. 1 removal shows a greater quantity than the figures shown in the red pocket diary would not also avail the respondents. After all. in a situation when anamath accounts are reco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly one comes across a witness whose evidence does not contain a grain of untruth or at any rate exaggeration, embroideries or embellishments. It is therefore the duty of the Court to sift and scrutinise the evidence carefully and in terms of the felicitous metaphor, separate the grain from the chaff. As the Supreme Court has observed Eldorado of absolute proof being -unattainable, the law accepts for it, probability as a working substitute in this work-a-day . world. In fine, legal proof is not necessarily a perfect proof but only a prudent man s estimate as to the probabilities of the case. The materials recovered during the course of investigation, the statement recorded from the various persons and the surrounding circumstances, coupled with the entries in the red pocket diary clearly point to the conclusion that the charge against the respondents regarding the clandestine removal of excisable goods is clearly made out by the Department. 9. The learned SDR s submission that under the impugned order, the Collector (Appeals) has fallen into error in placing reliance on the findings of the Additional Collector in respect of a different case is well founded. First of all, I should ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... signature or any statement contained in the document. It is not disputed by the petitioner s counsel that the expression document" would include the statement signed by the co-accused. Section 139 leaves no doubt that a court shall presume unless the contrary is proved that the signature of the maker is genuine and every other part of the document is equally genuine. This is the principle on which the court must act. Section 139 does not exclude the applicability of this principle in proceedings before an administrator. If it is open to a court to draw the statutory presumption it is equally open to an administrator in proceedings of this kind to draw a like presumption and conclude in the absence of evidence to the contrary that every word contained in the statement and the signature appearing on the face of it are those of the maker. This being the position in law the respondents were entitled to rely upon every word in the statement signed by the witnesses notwithstanding their attempt to retract therefrom especially when there is no evidence of threat." 11. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of this case it is for the respondents to prove and substantiate their plea t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
