9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (4) TMI 324X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... losure as a calculated plan to regularise the earnings from his illegal activities . As regards the savings from salary to the tune of ₹ 30,000/- during 1966 to 1968, the present petitioner has failed to produce any proof worth the name, leave apart salary slip, not even the identity card, of having served as a seaman in the Navigation Department. There is a concurrent finding of facts by the competent authority as well as the appellate authority, and therefore, this Court cannot enter into the arena of re-appreciation of evidence on record to come to a different conclusion than the one taken by the authorities below. The scope of the powers while dealing with a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution is very limited a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that there was no allegation to the effect that the petitioner was previously convicted in any proceedings under Section 6(1) of the (SAFEMA for short) and any other proceedings were initiated or pending or dropped by the competent authority. According to the petitioner, the competent authority had issued notice on 22-11-1979 on the basis of the same incident wherein his brother Kalanbhai Morarbhai Tandel was detained and the petitioner was shown as an affected person vide notice bearing No. CA/AHD/2(c)/U-14/79-80, dated 22-11-1979. According to the petitioner, the respondent no. 1-competent authority had also mentioned the same allegations as also the property in the notice dated 22-9-1988. According to the petitioner, the notice Annexure ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d so also the petition is required to be allowed, (iii) that the petitioner was serving in the Navigation Department of the Government of India till 1964 and the petitioner was getting salary of Rs. 250/-per month and it was increased to Rs. 400/- per month. The petitioner was also getting agricultural income and also earning from fishing and from these sources of income, he saved money and he has purchased the land in question, (iv) that the petitioner has voluntarily disclosed his income before the Income-tax Department on 21-1-1969 whereby the petitioner has disclosed all sources of income from which he saved the money, and (v) that the petitioner was able to establish that he has purchased the land in question from the legal source of i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e affidavit-in-reply, and hence also, cause of action arises for fresh show cause notice under Section 6(1) and notice dated 22-9-1988 was issued proposing to forfeit the properties. Mr. Sejpal next submitted that because of the above referred to facts after lifting the say granted by this Court, the second notice was issued in the year 1988 and so there is no delay in initiating proceedings and proceedings were initiated within reasonable time. Mr. Sejpal next argued that merely by not referring the first notice in the second show cause notice, it could not be said that the second notice was illegal and issued after a long lapse of time. Mr. Sejpal next argued that no evidence is produced by the present petitioner in reference to contentio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... impugned notice was stayed during the pendency of the said petition and only in April, 1987 the stay was partially lifted. It is to be noted that during the pendency of the above referred petition before the Court, the petitioner was also convicted under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 by the Court of J.M.F.C, Valsad, in Criminal Case No. 79 of 1978 by his judgment dated 6-6-1979 holding therein that regarding the above referred facts of conviction of the present petitioner, the case of the petitioner came under the purview of Section 2(2)(a)(i) of the Act. It is also to be noted that after the stay was lifted the competent authority issued a fresh notice dated 22-9-1988 against the petitioner. It is also found that the earlier notice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the effect that the petitioner had income from agriculture. However, it may be noted that the appellate Tribunal while dealing with this issue has rightly held that the present petitioner had made voluntary disclosure as a calculated plan to regularise the earnings from his illegal activities relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Tekchand v. Competent Authority, 201 ITR 658. As regards the savings from salary to the tune of Rs. 30,000/- during 1966 to 1968, the present petitioner has failed to produce any proof worth the name, leave apart salary slip, not even the identity card, of having served as a seaman in the Navigation Department. 8. Viewed in the light of the discussion as above, I find that the reasoning adopted an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
