SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(Cal) 524

SUBHAS CHANDRA SEN
TITAGARH PAPER MILLS CO. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
MANAS PANDA, N.C.ROY CHAUDHARY, SAMIR CHAKRABORTY, SUNIL CHATTERJEE

SUHAS CHANDRA SEN, J.

( 1 ) THIS case reveals an extraordinary attitude of the Central Excise Department. Court orders are not being carried out in case after case, day after day, when money is directed to be realised by the Collector of Central Excise. Goods had been cleared by furnishing bank guarantees for the disputed amounts to the satisfaction of the Collector of Central Excise under orders of Court. When after final hearing, Court directs the Collector to realise the duty by encashment of bank guarantees, it is found in most cases that the bank guarantees are not traceable in the files of the department or the bank guarantees have been allowed to lapse. No initiative is taken by the Collector or the Assistant Collector or anybody else in his department to find out what has happened to the bank guarantees and whether it is possible to encash the bank guarantees. No attempt is even made to contact the bank; no criminal proceeding has been started in a single case so far. In some of the extreme cases, this Court suo motu has issued contempt proceedings against the writ petitioners, but not a single contempt application has been filed on behalf of the Central Excise Department.




Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top