9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 483X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as a nonexistent and fake company. The evidence which was taken note of by the disciplinary authority was that there was no evidence of any physical verification of the goods except for endorsement in the crossing register and the signature of the crossing officer on the bills of export. The invoices mentioned in the bills of export were in different formats which were signed by different authorized representatives of the exporter within a short period of time. No evidence was found by the disciplinary authority to establish the local custom of using tyre carts to export goods. The disciplinary authority also found that the enquiry officer blindly accepted the contentions of the respondent and submitted a report which was not at all fair, proper and acceptable. The fact that the respondents at the relevant time was Inspector of Customs posted at Jogbani Land Custom Station, who were responsible for issuing export orders, it was incumbent upon them to have verified the contents of the commodities before issuing any such export order. The non-existent transportation firms whose services are stated to have been utilized for transporting goods and the other irregularities found d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Land Custom Station, Jogbani, who too has been subjected to a punishment of reduction of 50% cut in his pension for five years by order dated 08.07.2013. The respondent in C.W.J.C. No. 2242 of 2019 also worked as the Inspector, Customs, Land Custom Station, Jogbani during 2000-2001, who also has been served with a similar punishment of reduction of 50% cut in his pension for five years by order dated 08.07.2013. The writ petitioners are the Union of India and the officials of the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs and Central Goods and Services Tax and Central Excise. They have assailed the order dated 05.05.2016 passed by the Tribunal in O.A. No. 562 of 2013 whereby the Presidential Order dated 08.07.2013 issued by the Under Secretary to the Government of India, directing for a reduction of 50% in the pension of the respondents for five years has been set aside. Based on two investigation reports dated 18.10.2004 and 14.11.2005 by the Directorate General, Central Excise Vigilance, Ahmedabad Zonal Unit and the Central Excise and Customs Commissionarate, Surat respectively, it was found that six Surat based exporters had claimed inadmissible export benefits by frau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ificates of export without actual export, no appraisal or crossing formalities having been done at the concerned Land Custom Station becoming part of the conspiracy could not be proved. The charge on the respondents of not maintaining absolute integrity and devotion in duty was also found to be unsubstantiated and therefore the opinion of the enquiry officer was that none of the charges against the respondents could be said to have been proved. Attention has been invited of this Court by the Counsel for the petitioners that unnecessary discussion was made in the report about the probative value of hearsay evidence and the actual connotation of the word connivance. On the legal issue viz. suspicion ought not to take the place of proof, the charges were held to be not proved against the respondents. Such opinion was also based on the fact that the evidence against the respondents was circumstantial and not direct. The enquiry officer accepted the endorsements/entries in the crossing register and signature of the bills of export and held it to be sufficient evidence to prove that the consignment had actually crossed Nepal. The story of bullock driven tyre carts being used in the tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion and ultimately the order dated 08.07.2013 was passed directing for 50% cut in the monthly pension otherwise admissible to the respondents for a period of five years. The gratuity which was admissible to the respondent in C.W.J.C. No. 1957 of 2019 was directed to be released if not required otherwise. The Tribunal, on taking note of the facts that 16 persons who also were subjected to such departmental proceeding with almost similar allegation were served with different penalties and some of them were let off only with warning and displeasure while some were exonerated and that the disciplinary authority had initially agreed with the enquiry report about the charges not being proved and that the punishment was purely based on the second stage advice, came to the conclusion that the disciplinary authority ought to have furnished disagreement note soon after the submission of the enquiry report and not after two years on receipt of the advice of the CVC. The Tribunal also took into account the judgment in case of Rajeev Kapoor, Jagdish Prasad Singh and Ramjit Kumari, some of the employees who were also subjected to departmental proceeding in the same transaction, by the Central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... linary authority on and of the materials available on record. The note of difference reflects an independent application of mind and the response of the respondents to such note of difference is not at all acceptable to us. With respect to the contentions raised on behalf of the respondents that different treatment was given to different officials at different stations, we find that different officials had different mandate of the job and only on consideration of their respective lapses, different punishment was meted out to them. The award of punishment is in the domain of the disciplinary authority over which the Tribunal or the Court cannot sit in appeal. All that is required to be seen is whether ample opportunity was given to a delinquent employees to explain his cause and that the assessment of the disciplinary authority is borne out by the records. It appears to be difficult for us to sustain the argument on behalf of the respondents that the order passed by the disciplinary authority was only a reiteration of the second stage advice. Attention of this Court has also been drawn towards the challenge put up by the petitioners against the orders passed by the Principa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
