LAXMI NARAYAN SHARMA Vs. SUPERINTENDENT C EX AND CUS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C. is directed against the order, dated February 1, 1995 whereby the Special Judicial Magistrate (Economic offences) Rajasthan, Jaipur, rejected petitioner's application under Section 245(2) Cr. P.C.

(2.) THE relevant facts are that the petitioner is the Managing Director of . R.S.R.K. Marbles Ltd., Nathdawara (Udaipur), which is engaged in the manufacture of irregular marbles slabs falling under Chapter 25 sub -heading No. 2504.21 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and attracting liability to pay excise duty. On October 13, 1988, the officers of the Excise and Customs Department conducted a survey at the business premises of petitioner's Company and found that the said Company had cleared 849.52 Sq. Mts. of marbles slabs, without payment of excise duty amounting to Rs. 8,919.96. It further appears that on examination of the record pertaining to production of slabs and gate passes it was also found that during the period from October 9, 1988 to October 13, 1988 the petitioner's Company had cleared 330.05 Sq. Mts. of marbles slabs, without accounting for in RG 1 Register and without payment of duty amounting to Rs. 3,465/ -. The officers were, therefore, of the opinion that petitioner's Company had contravened the provisions of Rules 9(1), [53(2)], [173Q] and 226 of Central Excise [Rules] amounting to Rs. 12,384/ - and thus committed the offences punishable under Sections 9(l)(b), 9(l)(bb) and 9(l)(bbb) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (for short, 'the Act') punishable under Section 9(l)(ii) of the Act.

(3.) MR . P.K. Kasliwal, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently urged that the order/circular/guidelines issued by the Board were binding on the officers of the Department of the Excise and Customs Department and therefore, the complaint filed in contravention of the binding circulars was not maintainable. In support of his contention Mr. Kasliwal relied upon the Supreme -Court decision in the case of K.P. Vergliees - : [1981]131ITR592(Cal) . The learned counsel produced the relevant circulars before me. The copy of the order, dated 28 July, 1989 passed by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise and Customs Division Jaipur, was also produced. The learned counsel appearing for the Excise and Customs Department could not dispute the authenticity of the documents produced by Mr. Kasliwal for the perusal of the Court.