Case Law Details
Jay Shree Industries Vs Union of India (Allahabad High Court)
Whether ‘redemption fine’ falls within the meaning of the word ‘penalty’ used in section 129 of the Scheme, we find neither word has been defined under the Scheme or the Rules framed thereunder or the principal Act, namely the Central Excise Act, 1944. Indisputably, the ‘redemption fine’ imposed on the petitioner was payable in lieu of ‘confiscation’. As to ‘confiscation’, historically, under the Roman Law, it was an act or desire of taking into hands of the Emperor and, to transfer it to the imperial treasury, the goods or the commodity forfeited. That principle appears to be existing in favour of the State, under the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with the Customs Act, 1962. Here, it may be noted that the powers of ‘confiscation’, though existing under the Customs Act, 1962, have been made applicable to the Central Excise Act, 1944 by virtue of notifications issued under section 12 of the Central Excise Act. Section 9 of that Act provides for penalties punishable with imprisonment, for specified offences. Section 11 AC of that Act provides for monetary penalties for short levy or non-levy of Central Excise duty, in certain cases. Again, section 15 B of that Act provides for levy of monetary penalty for failure to furnish information on return (under section 15A). These penalties are imposable on the ‘person’ offending the law. On the other hand, by virtue of section 110 and other provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 read with notification no. 68/63 dated 04.05.1963 (as amended), goods found to have been cleared in contravention of the Central Excise Act, 1944 may be confiscated.
Section 34 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 creates a fine in lieu of ‘confiscation’.
The above provision is similar in scope and ambit to section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962.
Plainly, same, or similar concept of ‘confiscation’ exists both under the Customs Act, 1962 and the Central Excise Act, 1944. It allows the revenue authorities to seize and confiscate any goods found offending those legislations. Under both enactments, such confiscation is in addition to the other penalties prescribed against the person offending the laws in the transaction that may give rise to an act of ‘confiscation’. Again, under both legislations, there is a right given to the offender to reclaim the title in the confiscated goods, subject to payment of an amount in addition to the other penalties that may have been imposed. That amount is known as the ‘redemption fine’, under both laws.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
