Page 22 - ELT_3rd_1st May 2020_Vol 372_Part

xx EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372
partner cannot be imposed under Section 114A of Customs Act, 1962 —
Mulchand M. Zaveri v. Commissioner of Customs, Ahmedabad (Tri. - Ahmd.) .......... 417
Personal hearing not granted in rejecting request of extension of EPCG
Licence, natural justice violated - See under EXIM ................ 330
Police and Violation of Customs Act, 1962 - First Information Report (F.I.R.)
- Quashing of - Search & seizure undertaken by Customs Department
and proceedings initiated under Section 72 of Customs Act, 1962 -
Customs officials quite vigilant in supervising and controlling the affairs
of import and export of liquor by licensee and in case any infirmity found
in maintaining the record, order of confiscation passed for the very act
which has been alleged by the police - Impugned F.I.R.s and other
consequent proceedings arising out of the same quashed, there being no
iota of evidence or material to prosecute the present applicants in
connection with them impugned F.I.R — Sunil Purshottam Mohatta v. State of
Gujarat (Guj.) ...................................... 314
Police department - Bonded warehouse - Scope of search by Police
department - See under STRICTURES AGAINST POLICE
DEPARTMENT ................................... 314
Polypropylene Multi-Filament Yarn (PPMF) - Test report of Chemical
Examiner identified the impugned goods to be Polypropylene Multi-
Filament Yarn which is further corroborated by the statement of the
proprietor of appellant co. - Synthetic filament yarn manufactured by
appellant classifiable under Tariff Item 5402 59 10 of Central Excise Tariff
from 2005-06 - However, Chemical Examiner’s report 29-9-2006 can be
applied only prospectively but not retrospectively — A.R. Trading Company
v. Commr. of C. Ex. (Appeals-II), Bangalore (Tri. - Bang.) ................... 388
Powers of Commissioner (Appeals), scope of - See under APPEAL ........ 397
Procedure of adjudication requires issuance of speaking order - See under
ADJUDICATION .................................. 400
Prosecution - Criminal prosecution for offences under Section 135 of
Customs Act, 1962 - Bail granted - Permission to travel abroad -
Respondent’s two minor children studying in United Arab Emirates
(UAE) and owing to his being detained in India, studies of children
seriously affected - Also, respondent’s business interests also being
jeopardized, as a result of his continued stay in India - Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate permitted the respondent to travel abroad,
subject to certain conditions - Details of address of respondent, during his
stay in Dubai, as well as details of his authorized Counsel in India
already provided by him in accordance with the directions - Respondent
not required any more for the purpose of investigation, and requisite
examination of the respondent already conducted - Resultantly,
respondent permitted to travel abroad for a period of two months -
However, respondent directed to register his presence in the Indian
Embassy at Dubai every 10 days — Directorate of Revenue Intelligence v.
Mohammed Nashruddin (Del.) ............................... 364
— Smuggling of gold - Acquittal - Accused No. 12 arraigned only because of
confessional statement of Co-accused No. 1 and acquitted - Accused No.
14 arraigned because of statement of Accused No. 12 acquitted by trial
Court relying on judgment in respect of Accused No. 12 - Such reliance
cannot be said to be misplaced - Confession recorded of Accused No. 1
not meeting with parameters of Section 26 of Evidence Act, 1872 -

EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st May 2020  22