Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (1) TMI 339

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e case against the appellant is that they have not discharged central excise duty on the goods manufactured and cleared by them. During the course of investigation, certain goods were seized under Rule 24 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The total value of finished goods, unfinished goods and raw materials is Rs. 98,01,350/-. An amount of Rs. 1,49,54,280/- in the form of currency was also seized by the officers under Section 110 of Customs Act, 1962. Later, on the request of the appellant, the finished goods, un-finished goods and the raw materials were released provisionally on submitting B-11 bond for an amount of Rs. 98,91,350/- with a bank guarantee of Rs. 24,72,838/- on 16.08.2001. The appellants were issued show cause notice dated 2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... During the course of argument, ld. Counsel for the appellant narrated the chronological events of each stage in this case. She submitted that the ld. Commissioner erred in rejecting their request for provisional release of the currency seized on the ground that the provisions of Section 110 A of Customs Act, 1962 is not made applicable to the Central Excise. She argued that when the seizure was effected, the currency was seized as "goods" in terms of Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962, the Original Authority's finding that there is no provision in Central Excise Act or Rules to provisionally release the currency seized is legally unsustainable. The authority, who has powers to seize, has the power to provisionally release the said go .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... requisite provision of law for provisional release of the seized currency under Central Excise Act, 1944, we find that the Commissioner is in error. We find that the seizure of currency in the present case is made under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 on the reasonable belief that they are sale proceeds of clandestinely manufactured and cleared excisable goods which are liable for confiscation. Section 110 of the Customs Act states that if the proper officer has reason to believe that any goods are liable to confiscation under this Act, he may seize such goods. Section 2 (22) of the Customs Act defines "goods" which includes currency. Since seizure of currency is made adopting the definition of "goods" as contained in Section 2(22) of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ther words, the power, which is applicable for the release of the provisional release of the seized goods is equally applicable to the provisional release of seized currency as sale proceeds of offending goods. Ld. Commissioner's observation that there is no specific provision under Central Excise Act, 1944, for provisional release of the seized currency is contrary to the guidelines mentioned in the Central Excise Manual and Department's own action for releasing the seized goods. Incidentally, we notice that the show cause notice dated 29.12.2011 issued proposing confiscation of the seized currency proposes such confiscation under Section 122 of the Customs Act, 1962. We find that though the said Section is not made applicable to C .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nterest. Even before the Hon'ble High Court, they have pleaded that they required the seized cash to be provisionally released to discharge duty liability with interest in this case so that they can approach again to the Settlement Commission for settling the case. Thus, in fact, release of the amount for payment of duty for settling the case would only safeguard the interest of Revenue. 11. Considering the legal position and keeping the interest of Revenue also, we find that the appellant is eligible for provisional release of the cash seized on similar terms already considered by the Revenue while releasing the seized goods. We order accordingly and dispose of the appeal. ( Operative portion already pronounced in the open court )

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates