TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (12) TMI 1594
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted 13.12.2016; or b) Issue a writ, order or directions in the nature of mandamus to the respondent to allow the presence of counsel for the petitioner during the recording of statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 (the Act). 2. After some arguments, counsel for the petitioner has not pressed the first relief in the writ petition, and to that extent the writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a 63 year old lady, who is a sleeping partner in two firms, namely, M/s. Lifa Enterprises and M/s. Goodluck Trading Company. The petitioner claims that Mr. Sanjay Puri, who is the other partner, is active in both the firms. The petitioner has placed on record the partnership....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... She claimed that her appearance would serve no purpose. Once again summons were issued to the petitioner on 16.11.2016, requiring the petitioner to appear with the documents regarding imports made by the firms. The petitioner again sent a response on 23.11.2016 stating that her appearance would serve no purpose except physical exertion to her when she is not feeling well. 7. In view of the repeated non-appearance of the petitioner in response to the notice issued to her, respondent no.3 preferred a complaint bearing CC No.51121/2016 u/s 174 and 175 IPC. The learned CMM took cognisance of the said complaint and the petitioner was summoned for 19.12.2016. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that on 19.12.2016, the petitioner appeared ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ice hours. Mr. Aggarwal submits that, though, the respondents conduct the inquiry even beyond the normal office hours - as that may be required on account of exigencies of a particular case, he submits that in the special facts of this case, the respondents shall hold the inquiry during normal office hours in the presence of a lady officer. 11. So far as the prayer sought by the petitioner to permit the presence of her counsel during recording of her statement u/s 108 of the Act is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on several earlier orders, whereby the Supreme Court and this Court has acceded to such prayer. Reference may be made to the following orders in this respect: i) Vijay Sajnani & Anr. V. UOI & An....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....alled away from his own house and questioned in the atmosphere of the Customs office without the assistance of his lawyer or his friends his constitutional right under Article 21 is violated. The argument proceeds thus : if the person who is used to certain comforts and convenience is asked to come by himself to the Department for answering questions it amounts to mental torture. We are unable to agree. It is true that large majority of persons connected with illegal trade and evasion of taxes and duties are in a position to afford luxuries on lavish scale of which an honest ordinary citizen of this country cannot dream of and they are surrounded by persons similarly involved either directly or indirectly in such pursuits. But that cannot b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has been rightly contended on behalf of the appellant that the relevant provisions, in this regard, of the FERA and the Customs Act are in pari materia and the object of the two Acts is also similar. As pointed out earlier, the case of Ramanlal Bhogilal [(1973) 1 SCC 696 : 1973 SCC (Cri) 583] was one arising under FERA. Consequently Criminal Appeal No. 476 of 1986 has to be allowed against that part of the judgment of the Delhi High Court which dealt with the right of the respondents to have their lawyer during their interrogation. 14. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Birendra Kumar Pandey & Anr. V. Union of India & Anr., in W.P.(Crl.) No.28/2012 decided on 16.04.201....