MOHAMMAD IRFAN KHAN Vs. SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Articles 226 and E27 of the Constitution of India by Mohammad Irfan Khan for quashing the orders passed by the Superintendent, Central Excise. Moradabad, respondent No. I, and the Deputy Collector, Central Excise, Allahabad, respondent No. 2, and for the grant of a writ of mandamus or any other consequential writ, order or direction which may be necessary in the circumstances of the case.

(2.) The petitioner is one of the three partners of the registeied Hrm hv the- name of Messrs All Mohammad Khan ahas Chhidda Khan which carries on the business of making tobacco products such as chewing and smoking tobacco from tobacco in raw form at Moradabad, The firm purchases tobacco in the form of tobacco leaf, tobacco stems, stalks and dust. On 13-4-1955, the firm received two consignments under Transport permits in Form II and numbered as 584517 and 584518, weighing 146 inaunds In all, contained in 128 bags. These bags of tobacco were despatched by Khan Mohammad of Laharpur in the district of Sitapur. The eonsicnor described the contents of the bags as "crushed leaf (dana)". The bags were stocked in the eodown of the petitioner. On 9-9-1955, Sri C. L. Sawhney, the then Superintendent of Centra) Excise at Moradabad, visited the godown and detained 19 bags weighing 18 maunds on the ground that tobacco sterns had been substituted for tobacco leaves. He opened 3 or 4 bags only. He directed the clerk in-charge of the godown not to remove the bags until they had been properly cheeked. The petitioner's case is that the bags were in the same condition in which they bad been received from Laharpur.

(3.) Thereafter the Superintendent served a show cause notice Annexirre "A'\ to the counter-affidavit, wherein it was alleged that the petitioner's firm had contravened Rules 151(c) and 160 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 inasmuch as the contents of 18 maunds of crushed leaves (dana) had been substituted by stems. The petitioner claims that the show cause notice is vague but a perusal thereof will clearly show that all the material information was entered therein though not full details, for example, weight, etc, After the conclusion of the enquiry, the Superintendent passed the order dated 1-3-53 contained in Annexure "A" to the petitioner's affidavit. A penalty of Rs. 30/- was imposed and the goods were confiscated under Rule 151(c) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, redeemable on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 20/- and duty, as and when 18 maunds stems were cleared from the warehouse. A duty was also imposed under Rule 161 on 18 maunda crushed leaves (dana) at the rate of -/6/- annas per maund.