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

2008 (12) TMI 838

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 17-5-2004, when the appellant was directed to deposit 20 per cent of the penalty amount as pre-deposit. It is stated that the appellant has complied with the said direction of this Tribunal. 4. Despite the notice, the appellant failed to appear or being represented on 22-9-2008, 5-11-2008 and 19-12-2008. It may be mentioned that the date of hearing for 22-9-2008 was fixed on 10-9-2008 after ascertaining the convenience of the parties in presence of Shri Navrup Singh, Advocate. On earlier occasions viz., 9-10-2007, 8-1-2008 hearing of this matter was required to be adjourned due to non-availability of the arguing C, the said letter dated 7-8-1996 counsel for appellant. As per provisions of section 19(5) of FEMA, 1999 an appeal is required to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d 9(1)(d) of FERA, 1973. While issuing the said show-cause notice reliance was made on the following documents : 1. Letter dated 13-1-1998 from Richmond College, London addressed to Mr. P. Thukral. 2. Copies of cheque No. 006877 for pound 900 and 000030 for pound 2,200 of Royal Bank of Scotland and favouring Richmond College, London. 3. Copy of fax message dated 13-5-1996 from Randhir Jain to Mr. P. Thukral. 4. Copy of letter dated 7-8-1996 from Pritam Thukral to Randhir Jain. 5. Statement of Shri Randhir Jain dated 22-7-1998 and recorded under section 40 of FERA, 1973. 8. It is well-settled that the confessional statement made voluntarily free from threat and inducement can be regarded presumptive of its truth. In this regard reference may .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that the threat, etc. has in fact been proved. If the facts and circumstances emerging from the evidence adduced make it reasonable probable that the confession could be the result of threat, inducement or pressure, the court will refrain from acting on such, confession, even if it be a confession made to a Magistrate or a person other than a police officer. Confessions leading to discovery of a fact which is dealt with under section 27 is an exception to the rule of exclusion of confession made by an accused in the custody of a police officer. Consideration of a proved confession affecting the person making it as well as the co-accused is provided for by section 30. Briefly and broadly, this is the scheme of the law of evidence vis- -vis c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... what has been clarified in Subramania Goundan 1958 SCR 428 case as regards the extent of corroboration required. The above expression does not imply that there should be meticulous examination of the entire material particulars. It is enough that there is broad corroboration in conformity with the general trend of the confession, as pointed out in Subramania Goundan case.' (p. 790) The analysis of the legal position in paras 18 and 19 is also worth noting : 18. Having thus reached a finding as to the voluntary nature of a confession, the truth of the confession should then be tested by the court. The fact that the confession has been made voluntarily, free from threat and inducement, can be regarded as presumptive evidence of its truth .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n that the fax message cannot be admissible as unsigned or irregularity of its recovery does not contained any merit. It is well-settled that evidence recovered cannot become inadmissible on the plea of irregularity rather in such a situation the court is required to examine the evidence carefully. In this regard reference may aptly be made to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Radha Krishna v. State of UP AIR 1963 SC 882. In Pushpadevi M. Jatia v. M.L. Wadhawan [1987] 3 SCC 367 the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that if evidence is relevant the court is not concerned with the method by which it was obtained. In the circumstances the argument that the seized documents cannot be used in evidence is rejected. 12. For the reason stat .....

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