Page 314 - ELT_15th June 2020_VOL 372_Part 6th

960 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372
Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (Contd.)
— jurisdiction of designated Court over scheduled offence cases - See under
MONEY-LAUNDERING .............................. 209
— jurisdiction over predicate offence cases - See under MONEY-
LAUNDERING ................................... 209
— Offences under Money Laundering Act to be investigated by competent
authorities under concerned statute and tried by Court competent under
that Act - Since sine qua non for prosecution of offence under Money
Laundering Act to be existence of proceeds of predicate offence,
conviction of offence under Money Laundering Act depends on
establishment of predicate offence and generation of proceeds of that
crime — Inspector of Police, CBI/SCB v. Asstt. Dir., Directorate of Enforcement (Ker.) ..... 209
— Section 4 - See under INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES ............ 209
— Section 44(1) - See under MONEY-LAUNDERING ................ 209
— Section 44(1)(a) - See under INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES ........ 209
— Section 44(1)(c) - See under INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES ........ 209
— See also under MONEY-LAUNDERING ................. 209
— Section 71 - See under MONEY-LAUNDERING ................. 209
Procedural lapse not a ground for denial of export rebate - See under
REBATE ....................................... 745
Procedure of adjudication requires issuance of speaking order - See under
ADJUDICATION .................................. 400
Prohibited goods’ redemption, permissibility thereof - See under
REDEMPTION FINE ................................ 249
Promissory estoppel not applicable on modification/variation in area based
exemption scheme - See under AREA BASED EXEMPTION .......... 495
Proof of export not established on making SEZ supply under advance
authorization licence without preparing Bill of Export - See under EXIM ... 638
Proper hearing opportunity not granted before adjudication, natural justice
violated - See under ADJUDICATION ...................... 614
Proportionate Cenvat credit on inputs/input services used in exempted
goods reversed, demand under Rule 6(3A)(i) of CCR not sustainable - See
under CENVAT CREDIT .............................. 867
Prosecution - Acquittal - Retraction of admission by accused - Acquittal on
the ground that statements of accused did not have any evidentiary value
in absence of independent corroboration or evidence especially after
retraction - Panch witness of panchnama recorded when goods were
seized, had not testified - All statements recorded in English but accused
contending that they do not read or write English - Accused retracting
confession recorded on first available opportunity - Detention of accused
by Customs Authorities from 22-1-1987 to 25-1-1987 was in violation of
Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Articles 21 and 22 of Constitution
of India - Statement of accused recorded under Section 108 of Customs
Act, 1962 not voluntary or absolutely truthful - Sessions Court in appeal
rightly holding that prosecution failed to prove its case - No reason to
interfere with order of acquittal passed 16 years ago — Assistant Collector of
Cus. (Preventive), Bombay v. Hasanali Rumi (Bom.) ..................... 527
— 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,
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th June 2020  314