TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (9) TMI 119
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....try dated 1-8-87 at ICD, New Delhi for clearance of goods i.e. decorative paper for laminate through its agents, M/s. Om International, New Delhi of which the petitioner No. 2 is the Director. The clearance was sought under REP Import Licence No. P/L/3149498/C/ZZ/02/Q/86/C.11.1, dated 9-10-86. The bill of entry was marked to Superintendent (CFS) for examination of goods with the direction to send the goods to the assessing officer. The goods were examined at CFS on 19-8-87 and samples were drawn in the presence of CHA and the Importer. On 24-8-1987, Assistant Collector (ICD) received information that the goods declared as 'Decorative paper for Laminates' were not as per declaration. He, therefore, ordered 100% examination of the goods on 25-8-87 in the presence of the importer, CHA, Superintendent (ICD) and Superintendent (CFS). Two cartons containing 10 samples/catalogue books for wall paper were found which had not been mentioned in the wrapper. The labels found on the goods clearly indicated that the goods were not decorative paper for laminates but were in fact wall paper. The licence produced by the importer did not cover importation of wall paper. Import of any goods into Ind....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for laminates' whereas these have been found to be 'decorative wall paper'. Character of the goods in both the cases is 'decorative paper'. There is only a difference in thickness and no doubt it has been admitted by the appellant that the imported goods could be used as 'wall paper'. Accordingly, we are of the view that in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case the invoice value cannot be discarded, as contended by the learned SDR, more so in the absence of any acceptable evidence regarding the correct valuation of the goods at the time and place of importation of the goods. In the circumstances, we hold that the department has failed to prove undervaluation of the goods in the instant case. We accordingly order that the value of the goods be accepted as declared by the appellant." 3.In the meantime on 28-4-1988, the Collector of Customs filed a complaint against the petitioners under Sections 132 and 135(1)(a) of the Act and Section 5 of the Imports and Export (Control) Act, 1947 whereupon the petitioners were ordered to be summoned. That the proceedings are going on a snail's pace is apparent from the fact that even after 14 years the complaint is still at the sta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Supreme Court was dealing with the criminal appeal against the decision of the High Court of Bombay in criminal revision application No. 238/66 wherein these questions of law had arisen for consideration. Another decision cited by Sh. Aggarwal is from Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of K. Neelakanta Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh reported in 2000 (122) E.L.T. (A.P.) wherein the petitioner was facing prosecution for gold smuggling and unauthorizedly holding foreign currency. He sought stay of the trial till the completion of the adjudication proceedings. Hon'ble High Court declined the request on the strength of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Assistant Collector of Customs (supra). Learned single Judge of Andhra Pradesh High Court also referred to two decisions of Delhi High Court in the case of S.K. Sinha v. S.K. Singal - [1987 (30) E.L.T. 900 (Del.) = (1987) 32 DLT 91 (Delhi)] and in the case of Willi Lemback v. Rajan Mathur & Another [XI-1992 (3) Crimes 692]. In both these cases this High Court has taken the view that if the department has no good case for the purpose of adjudication it will be most unjust to require the petitioners to go through the enti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t claim to have a good case for purposes of criminal prosecution, particularly when the prosecution is also based on the same set of facts and evidence. It will be most unjust to require the petitioner to go through the entire process of the prosecution in the circumstances of this case. This might virtually amount to persecution and in my view this will amount to abuse of the process of the Court. In view of the findings of Tribunal there is no case against the petitioner. It is as such not legal to prosecute the petitioner of a criminal offence on this set of facts and evidence." 6.In the case of P.S. Rajya v. State of Bihar - 1996 S.C. Cases (Cri.) 897, the appellant an Income Tax Officer was prosecuted by the CBI for being found in possession of the disproportionate assets. Later on the Central Vigilance Commission exonerated the appellant in the departmental proceedings and this was concurred by the UPSC. The appellant then filed a petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. in the High Court for quashing prosecution but the High Court rejected the petition being of the view that issues raised had to be gone into in the final proceedings. The appellant then approached the Supreme C....