9911796707
TMI Blog1972 (8) TMI 44X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f rules 9, 53, 54, 67, 68, 70, 71, 76 and 226 of the Central Excise Rules punishable under section 9(b) and (d) of the Act and also under Section 420 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code. The High Court found that the prosecution in both the cases was barred by the rule of limitation in Section 40 of the Act. The acts complained of in criminal Appeal No. 194 of 1969 occurred on 25 July, 1964 and the complaint was filed on 18 May, 1965. In Criminal Appeal No. 1965 of 1969 the acts complained of occurred on 20 June, 1964 and the complaint was filed on 15 January, 1965. 4. The appellant's contentions are three-fold. First, the section applies only to Government servants. Second, the words ''anything done or ordered to be done under this Act" in the section do not mean any act in violation of the provisions of the Act. Third, the protection given to Government servants under the section is for actions done inadvertently or mistakenly but not for acts done deliberately and maliciously. It was therefore said that the prosecution of the respondents was not within the mischief of the section. 5. The respondent's contention on the other ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on inspection of lorry despatches and clearances of the factory, it was found that during 1963-64 and 1964-65 upto 20 June, 1964 the licensee had actually cleared without entry in the official Central Excise Record and without payment of duty a quantity of matches in excess of the quantity shown in the records. The complaint was that the accused had attempted to deprive the Central Government of Rs. 2,437.50 being the Excise duty calculated at the standard rate. The accused were alleged to have committed violation of Rules 9, 53, 64, 66, 67, 68, 70 and 226 of the Central Excise Rules punishable under Section 9 (b) and (d) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and also under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 111 and 109 of the Indian Penal Code. 7. In Criminal Appeal No. 194 of 1969, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate on 30 November, 1965 acquitted the accused of the charges and held that the bar of limitation under the section applied to the prosecution by the State. The complaint was received in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate on 18 May, 1965. The inspection of factory by the Central Excise Staff was on 25 July, 1964. The Sub-Divisional Magi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore, sub-section (2) is applicable to any individual or persons. 11. Reference may be made to some statutes to indicate as to how the Legislature places bar against any class of persons in respect of suits, proceedings, prosecutions for anything done or ordered to be done under the relevant statute. 12. Section 20 of the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Act, 1955 (16 of 1955) containing two sub-sections is a type. The first sub-section there speaks of bar of suits or other legal proceedings against the collecting Government or against any officers in respect of any order passed in good faith or any action in good faith done or ordered to be done under the Act. The second sub-section there speaks of bar of suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding against the collecting Government or against any officer for anything done or ordered to be done under the Act after the expiration of six months from the accrual of the cause of action or from the date of the act or order complained of. These provisions illustrate the manner in which the Legislature has by appropriate words placed bar of suits or prosecution or other legal proceedings only against the Government ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nly the Legislature has chosen proper words of limitation to ensure the restricted operation of the provisions of the statute. 17. The provisions contained in Section 40 of the Act in the present case show that the first sub-section speaks of bar of suits against the Central Government or any officer of the Government in respect of orders passed in good faith or act in good faith done or ordered to be done. The second sub-section of section 40 provides bar of limitation of time in respect of suits, prosecutions or other legal proceedings without any qualifying words as to person against whom suit, proceeding and prosectuion shall be instituted. The contention of the appellant that sub-section (2) is confined only against the Government officers is not warranted by the words of the statute and is repelled by reference to other comparable statutes which have indicated in clear words when the statute contemplates bar of suits, proceedings or prosecution against Government servants only. The words in section 40 (2) of the Act in the present case are of wide amplitude to apply to the prosecution which was commenced against the respondents in the present appeals. 18. Section 40(2) of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nderols purchased and used. Rule 68 deals with the manner of affixing banderols. Every banderol shall be so affixed that the words and figures on the banderol specifying the maximum number of matches covered by the banderol are legible. The box or booklet cannot be opened without tearing the banderol, and where it is affixed to a box, the ends of the banderol are covered by the factory's label. Rule 70 states that as soon as possible after matches are finished they shall be banderolled and enclosed in packets and presented to the officers of the factory for assessment. Rule 71 deals with the method of packing. Rule 226 sets out that the entry books, stock account and warehouse register should be maintained. Reference to these rules is necessary to understand the requirements of the Act and the violations committed by the respondents. The complaint in the present appeals against the respondents was that the stock and accounts were examined and the banderols affixed to the unit box were also examined. The examination revealed that cut banderols have been affixed and full length torn banderols were affixed with a view to evade excise duty. Unbanderolled matches were also found in exce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l trial in respect of the offence of filing false returns of sales tax. Section 26 of the C.P. and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947 provided inter alia that no prosecution shall be instituted against any person in respect of anything done or intended to be done under the Act unless the prosecution has been instituted within three months of the date of the Act complained of. It was contended that the words "any person" showed the intention of the Legislature to give protection to Government servants in regard to prosecution and not to persons other than Government servants. This Court did not accept that contention, because there were no words to restrict the meaning of the words "any person". Furthermore this Court held that when the appellant in that case submitted returns he did so under the provisions of the Act. When he produced the accounts he did so under the provisions of the Act. The filing of the returns and the production of accounts could not be said to be outside the provisions of the Act. 25. These decisions in the light the definition of the word 'act in the General Clauses Act establish that non-compliance with the provisions of the statute by omitting to do what the act e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
