Page 156 - ELT_3rd_1st May 2020_Vol 372_Part

378 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

mentioned therein. Only for reaching a definite conclusion so as to eliminate any
doubt, the Commissioner (Appeals) directed the original authority to look into
certified copy of the bail application and to ascertain whether the bills were
available at the time of applying for bail itself. The original authority instead of
confining to this limited direction to verify has indeed travelled beyond the
scope of remand and given the following findings which is extracted herein be-
low for better appreciation :
“48. In compliance of the Appellate Authority’s direction, a reference was
made to the Investigating Section (R&I) to verify whether the impugned
bills submitted by the noticees during the recording of their statements be-
fore the Custom Authorities were certified copies obtained from Court rec-
ords.
49. The Investigating Section (Rummaging & Intelligence) informed vide
their note in F.No. OS. No. 02/2014 RSI-SEA, dated 28-5-2018 :
“From the records available in R&I Section it is observed that the
bills mentioned were not available during seizure and were submit-
ted to the court later. Also record does not show that bills certified
by court were submitted while recording Statements at this office
on 12-5-2014.” ”
10. On going through the discussions made by the original authority, I
find that instead of confining himself to comparing or ascertaining the fact after
obtaining certified copy of the bail application, has conducted re-adjudication as
to whether bills are genuine or not. It is however recorded by him that bills were
not available during seizure and that these were submitted to Court later. Need-
less to say that the bail application was filed before court only after arrest and
seizure. He does not state that the bills were not mentioned in the bail applica-
tion.
11. Ld. Counsel has furnished certified copy of bail application submit-
ted before the George Town Court, Chennai. Ld. A.R. has countered the said ap-
plication submitting that the impression of the seal seen on the application is
dated 20-3-2014 and that too of Economic Offences Court at Egmore and there-
fore the certified copy cannot be relied. On perusal of the bail application fur-
nished before me which is seen in page 12 of the compilation, the docket sheet of
the bail application shows that it was filed on 1-3-2014. The Court has given the
number as M.P. No. 420/2014. The notice of the application is seen received by
the Prosecutor on 1-3-2014. The order granting bail was passed by the Metropoli-
tan Magistrate, George Town on 3-3-2014. It is noted on the said order that they
are released on bail on 1-3-2014 on a condition to report before the Inspector of
Police until further orders. In the bail application, it is pleaded that gold was
purchased vide bills dated 18-2-2014, 19-2-2014 and 22-2-2014. Thus the doubt
raised by the Commissioner (Appeals) whether the appellants were in possession
of the bills at the time of filing bail application itself, stands eliminated.
12. The bail application has been countered by the Ld. A.R. on the basis
of the impression of seal seen on the main application. This document before me
is photocopy of a certified copy obtained by the appellants from the Magistrate
Court, Egmore. The application for certified copy was made on 2-11-2017 and
certified copy was delivered on 9-11-2017 from the impression of seal made by
copyist Superintendent for issue of certified copy. After stage of bail, the entire
EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st May 2020  156