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

2010 Supreme(Mad) 5426

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ARUNA JAGADEESAN
Ist Petitioner
Versus
Ist Respondent
Crl.OP.No.26975 of 2010
Decided On : 15-12-2010

The seriousness of the offence, prima facie evidence, and the petitioner's non-cooperation were crucial in the court's decision to dismiss the anticipatory bail petition.

Headnote:

Customs Act - Anticipatory Bail - Section 108, 132, 135 - 62(2), 68, 71, 111(j), 112(a)

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a managing director of two companies, sought anticipatory bail in connection with the suspicion of diversion of scrap billets and plates from bonded warehouses. The respondent alleged illegal removal of goods from the warehouses, evading customs duty.

Finding of the Court:

The court dismissed the petition, considering the serious nature of the offence, prima facie evidence of duty evasion, and the petitioner's failure to cooperate with the investigating agency.

Issues: Alleged illegal removal of goods from bonded warehouses, evasion of customs duty, and the petitioner's failure to cooperate with the investigating agency.

Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the seriousness of the offence, prima facie evidence, and the petitioner's non-cooperation as grounds for dismissing the anticipatory bail petition.

Final Decision: The Criminal Original Petition seeking anticipatory bail was dismissed by the court.

Judgment :

1. The Petitioner has filed this Criminal Original Petition seeking anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the proceedings in F.No.S.Misc.154/2010 SIIB on the file of the Respondent herein.

2. The Petitioner submits that he is the Managing Director of the Company called M/s.Jai Bhawani Steel Enterprises Limited situated at New No.91, Old No.44, II Floor, Armenion Street, Chennai 600001 and the said Company is engaged in the business activities with another Company by name M/s.SDS Steel Private Limited, which has got its manufacturing unit at New No.2/221 (Old No.4/181), GNT Road, Panchetty 601204. M/s.Jai Bhawani Steel Enterprises Limited procures scrap of different types, like HMS, LMS, MS Turning and Borings, used Tin and Can Bundles, Shredded Scrap, etc. The materials so procured are sent to the manufacturing Unit at Panchetty of M/s.SDS Steel Private Limited for conversion of the same into MS Billets.

3. According to the Petitioner, M/s.Jai Bhawani Steel Enterprises Limited stored its materials to to the tune of 29667.639 MTS at the bonded warehouse. The Company already submitted advance license to the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Bond Department, Chennai for the clearance of the said materials along with a letter dated 18.1.2010. M/s.DDS Steel Rolling Mills Pvt. Limited also filed ex-bond bills of entry to the tune of 375.3880 MTS. There was some delay in the clearance, for which the Company had been corresponding with the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Bond Department) Chennai.

4. It is the case of the Petitioner that the Respondent, suspecting that there had been diversion of scrap billets, plate, etc., has initiated proceedings and sent a notice under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 to the Petitioner calling upon him to appear before the Respondent on 18.11.2010 at 11.00 a.m. There has been no violation of any of the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 and M/s.Jai Bhawani Steel Enterprises Limited has got a valid license to carry on it activities. In the said circumstances, the Petitioner, apprehending arrest in connection with the offences under Sections 132 and 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 and the proceedings in F.No.S.Misc.154/2010 SIIB on the file of the Respondent, has filed this Criminal Original Petition seeking anticipatory bail.

5. In the counter affidavit, the Respondent has stated that M/s.Jai Bhawani Steel Enterprises Limited and M/s.SDS Steel Private Limited, in which the Plaintiff is a Managing Director were having customs notified private bonded warehouses at 2/220, GNT Road, Panjetty Village, licensed in terms of Section 58(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. They had illegally removed imported materials such as billets, plates, heavy and light melting scrap of various types from their bonded warehouses without payment of customs duty. They had several time expired bonds from the year 2007-2008, for which demand notices were issued and action was initiated under Section 72 to detain and sell such portion of their goods, if any, to make good the shortfall in duty. But, there was no cargo available in the bonded warehouses.

6. The Respondent further stated in the counter that it was ascertained that the importers were attempting to illegally clear the non existent goods on paper and regularise the records by assessing the ex-bond bills of entry against advance licenses, for which they had already filed ex-bond bills of entry in many cases and they had approached the assessing group for duty free clearance under the licence. The Bond Department refused to clear under advance licence scheme and the importer has gone on appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the decision of the Department, thereby creating an illusion that the goods are still available in the bonded warehouses. Whereas they had stealthily removed the goods from the bonded warehouses. As the bond period had expired and the importer had failed to pay the duty and interest and clear the go



























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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 Back to top