TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court quashes criminal proceedings due to change in evasion assessment, falling below prosecution limit.</h1> The Court quashed the criminal proceedings in E.O.C.C. No. 362 of 2002 as they were deemed infructuous due to a change in assessment of evasion of central ... Prosecution Issues involved: Quashing of criminal proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C due to change in assessment of evasion of central excise duty and increase in minimum monetary limit for prosecution.Details of the judgment:Issue 1: Change in assessment of evasion of central excise dutyThe petitioner sought to quash the criminal proceedings initiated by the respondent based on a complaint for evasion of central excise duty. The initial demand was Rs. 27,39,678/-, but after a remand order by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, the evasion amount was fixed at Rs. 4,03,000/-. The petitioner argued that the complaint became infructuous due to the change in assessment, as the initial basis for the complaint was no longer valid. The respondent, through their counsel, admitted that the complaint had indeed become infructuous in light of the Tribunal's order and the subsequent assessment below the minimum limit required for prosecution.Issue 2: Increase in minimum monetary limit for prosecutionThe Board's Letter dated 4-4-2006 raised the minimum monetary limit for launching prosecution for evasion of excise duty from Rs. 5,00,000/- to Rs. 25,00,000/-. Despite the initial assessment being above the new limit, the subsequent assessment after remand fell below the revised threshold. The petitioner contended that the complaint should be dismissed as infructuous due to the change in assessment and the fact that the evasion amount was now below the minimum limit for prosecution. The respondent did not dispute these facts and acknowledged that the complaint was no longer valid for prosecution.The Court agreed with the petitioner's arguments, noting that the order of remand by the Tribunal had not been challenged by the department. Any revision to the assessment above the minimum limit could potentially provide a fresh cause of action for prosecution, but it would not salvage the already initiated proceedings. Consequently, the Court quashed the criminal proceedings in E.O.C.C. No. 362 of 2002 on the grounds of it being infructuous. The connected miscellaneous petition was also closed as a result of this decision.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
