9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (7) TMI 738X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sent by Non-Resident N.P. Ammed of Qatar and by sale, converted the same into Indian Rupees which were further paid to the persons in India as directed, by order or on behalf of N.P. Ammed on payment of commission of Rs. 500 per lakh. The allegation is that the appellant received and paid Rs. 1,21,87,142 in the manner aforesaid. This is an old appeal of 1995, so this lapse of long period justifies full dispensation of the pre-deposit of penalty to the appellant. An order was passed accordingly. Presently, this appeal is taken up for hearing for its disposal on merits. 2. Learned counsel Shri K.A. Jabbar has filed written submissions which are taken on record. On the other side, despite wait of more than 3 months, the respondent has not fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se was again fixed but second hearing notice did not permit more than a week s time for appearance before Adjudicating Authority which cannot be termed as a reasonable time for preparation under Rule 3 of the Adjudication Proceeding and Appeal Rules, 1973 read with section 51 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. Though, request for adjournment was made but Adjudicating Authority proceeded with the matter ex parte without granting further adjournment while impugned ex parte order itself was passed after consuming six months which, otherwise, this period could have been utilized for adjournment and factual hearing of the appellant. 6. Admittedly, the first notice of hearing was served. Thereupon, adjournment was requested and granted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... factual matrix discussed therein keeping in mind the factual flexibility. In this regard, Apex Court in Escorts v. CCE 2004 (8) SCC 335 has observed as follows:- 8. Courts should not place reliance on decisions without discussing as to how the factual situation fits in with the fact situation of the decision on which reliance is placed. Observations of Courts are neither to be read as Euclid s theorems nor as provisions of the statute and that too taken out of their context. These observations must be read in the context in which they appear to have been stated. Judgments of Courts are not to be construed as statutes. To interpret words, phrases and provisions of a statute, it may become necessary for judges to embark into lengthy discussio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is not proper. 11. The following words of Lord Denning, in the matter of applying precedents have become locus classicus : Each case depends on its own facts and a close similarity between one case and another is not enough because even a single significant detail may alter the entire aspect, in deciding such case, one should avoid the temptation to decide cases (as said by Cardozo) by matching the colour of one case against the colour of another. To decide therefore, on which side of the line a case falls, the broad resemblance to another case is not at all decisive. ****** Precedent should be followed only so far as it marks the path of justice, but you must cut the dead wood and trim of the side branches else you will find yourself lost ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... follows: We think it is not necessary to recapitulate and recite all the decisions on this legal aspect. But suffice to say that the core of all the decisions of this Court is to the effect that the voluntary nature of any statement made either before the Customs authorities or the officers of Enforcement under the relevant provisions of the respective Acts is a sine qua non to act on it for any purpose and if the statement appears to have been obtained by any inducement, threat, coercion or by any improper means that statement must be rejected brevi manu. At the same time, it cannot be recorded as involuntary or unlawfully obtained. It is only for the maker of the statement who alleges inducement, threat, promise, etc. to establish that su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sion has to be proved in accordance with the provisions of Indian Evidence Act but prosecution failed in that duty. Moreover, some of the witnesses, and more particularly witnesses of the search memo, resiled and did not support their presence at the time of search and neither they supported the recovery from the search. The position is not the same before this Tribunal. There appears no reason to discard the admissional statement when the factual scenario discussed by Apex Court in K.T.M.S. Mohd. s case (supra) is kept in mind. Also, the finding of the Criminal Court cannot be said as binding in a proceeding before this Tribunal. Therefore, the arrival of guilt against the appellant by Adjudicating Authority for contravention of the provis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
