9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (4) TMI 214X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns of Section 140 of the Customs Act will apply to the adjudication proceedings under Chapter 14 of the Customs Act? (2) Whether a partnership firm is a person within the meaning of Section 112 of the Customs Act? (3) Whether the imposition of penalty on the firm Jain Stationery Mart by the Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Hyderabad under Section 112 of the Customs Act is legal? (4) Whether notices to the partners of the firm be considered as a notice to the firm in the circumstances of the case? (5) Whether the confiscation of the goods is legal when notices been sent to the other partners beyond the period of 6 months from the date of seizure? (6) Whether the said order of confiscation is not vitiated by the provisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Act and notice to the partners would not tantamount to statutory notice to the firm and an important question of law with reference to the interpretation of the word person occurring in Section 112 of the Act as to whether that would include a firm as envisaged under Secton 140 of the Act would arise out of the impugned order of the Tribunal meriting reference. The learned Counsel further submitted that all other questions set out in the application would only be incidental or consequential to the said main question and so did not make specific submissions on the same. We therefore instead of taking up each question piecemeal for consideration deal with the main question elaborately argued by the learned Counsel and set out above and c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in dealing with the contraband goods under seizure. Since a firm is not a juristic person or a legal entity like a company incorporated under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act and is merely a compendious description of all the partners, penalty imposed on the firm was really a penalty on the partners. When the firm does not have an independent legal existence and cannot be called a juridical person in the eye of law and when the partners comprising the firm have been served with show cause notice as per law resulting in the imposition of a penalty on the firm under Section 112(b) of the Act, in our opinion, the question relating to the applicability of the provisions of Section 140 defining the meaning of the word company as in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted by the Supreme Court in the ruling of Dulichand Laxminarayan v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Nagpur - AIR 1956 SC 354. 4. It would not be out of place to refer to the definition of the term partnership occurring in the Indian Partnership Act (Central Act 9 of 1932): Partnership is the relation which subsists between persons who have agreed to combine their property, labour or skill in some business, and to share the profits thereof between them." In civil law when a suit is filed in the name of a firm it is a suit by all the partners of the firm and the Supreme Court has held that even if O.XXX of the Code of Civil Procedure had not been introduced into the Code and a suit had been filed in the name of a firm, it would not be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e is a partner and where by a wrongful act of a partner in the ordinary course of business of a firm, any penalty is incurred the firm is liable to the same extent as the partner. In the instant case the material facts and relevant ingredients of the penal provisions have been clearly set out in the show cause notice issued to all the partners who comprise the firm and the Tribunal under the impugned order on appreciation of the relevant evidence and materials on record has found the firm liable to penal consequences which have to be borne by the partners of the firm. The Madras High Court in the case of Swaranath Bhatia - AIR 1948 Mad 427 - held that a partner comprising a firm would be liable for contravention of a provision of law by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act and the two sections are entirely independent of each other and it would not be proper to read the limitation prescribed by Section 110(2) as a limitation for proceedings under Section 124 of the Act. 6. The question of sufficiency of corroboration of the evidence of a person in the position of an accomplice is a finding of fact and not a question of law, and likewise, the credibility to be attached with reference to the identification of applicant Vansraj by Chandi Narayana, eight months after his first statement was recorded is also a question of fact. 7. The finding that the contraband goods were recovered from the place rented out to the firm and in its possession, and foreign nature or origin of the goods under seizure a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
