SATYANARAYAN MISHRA Vs. ASSISTANT COLLECTOR C EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the judgment of Shri B.C. Jha, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi who had convicted the petitioners under Section 9(B) of the Central Excise Act (the Act) and sentenced both of them to undergo R.I fox six months. He further convicted petitioner No. 2, Bindeshwari Pd. Roy to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- (one thousand) in default, further R.I. for two months. Both the petitioners had preferred appeal before the Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi which was heard by the 2nd Addl. Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Cr. Appeal No. 73/81 who confirmed the judgment and sentence and dismissed the appeal on 11-6-1985. Thereafter, the petitioners have challenged the judgments of both the courts below in this revision application.

(2.) Mr. Narayan Roy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, has submitted that removal of tobacco from the warehouse which was already assessed to tax, does not amount to an offence of evasion of duty for which they could not have been convicted under Section 9(B) of the Act. It was submitted that non-payment of duty would not amount to evasion of duty even though the tobacco, so removed, was assessed to duty as the duty was realisable under the Act and the Rules.

(3.) On the other hand, Mr. Debi Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party, has submitted that the petitioners has not paid the duty and had removed the tobacco which, in substance, amounts to evasion of duty.