Karnataka High Court
The Additional Director General vs M/S Hindustan Granites on 22 November, 2013
Bench: N.Kumar, Rathnakala
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013
P RESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA
WRIT APPEAL NOS.5954 - 5959/2013 (T- TAR)
BETWEEN:
1. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL,
DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE,
ZONAL UNIT, NO 503, 3RD MAIN,
OMBR LAYOUT, BANASWADI,
BANGALORE - 560 043.
2. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR/DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE,
ZONAL UNIT, NO.503, 3RD A MAIN,
OMBR LAYOUT, BANASWADI,
BANGALORE - 560 043.
3. SENIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICER,
DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE,
ZONAL UNIT, NO.503, 3RD A MAIN,
OMBR LAYOUT, BANASWADI,
BANGALORE - 560 043.
4. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE,
BANGALORE III DIVISION, 7TH FLOOR,
C WING, KENDRIYASADAN,
KORAMANGALA,
BANGALORE - 560 034. ...APPELLANTS
(common in all the appeals)
(By SRI N.R. BHASKAR, ADV.)
-2-
AND:
M/S. HINDUSTAN GRANITES,
UNIT II, SURVEY NO.31 AND 32,
HOSUR ROAD, ATTIBELLE,
BANGALORE
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR
SHRI. ANANDREDDY. ...RESPONDENT
(common in all the appeals)
(BY SRI G. SHIVADASS FOR
SRI LAKSHMI KUMARAN &
SRI SRIDHARAN, ADVS FOR R1.)
THESE WRIT APPEALS ARE FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION
NO.14827/2013 DATED 05/09/2013.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, N. KUMAR, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
These appeals are preferred by the Intelligence Bureau challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.NO.14827/2013 and other connected matters.
2. Respondent is a proprietary concern, it is a 100% export oriented unit. It is engaged in the manufacture of polished granites and marble slabs. The premises of the respondent was searched, incriminating documents were found they were seized, -3- marble slabs were also seized. There was a serious violation of various provision of law. Therefore, 46 summons were issued to the respondent up to 31.03.2013. However, the respondent has honoured only 19 summons and dodged other summons. The respondent also deposited a sum of Rs.2 crores on 06.06.2012, during the investigation.
3. It is in this background, respondent filed W.P.No.14827/2013 for a writ of mandamus directing the appellants forthwith to refund the amount of Rs.2 cores collected unauthorisedly during investigation as there was no justification to collect any amount during investigation. W.P.No.14828/2013 was filed to direct the respondent to allow de-bonding of DG Set value of which is Rs.2,56,000/- on payment of appropriate duty, which writ petition came to be disposed of on 02.04.2013. W.P.No.14829/2013 is filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the appellants to terminate the investigation forthwith. W.P.No.14830/2013 is filed for quashing the letter bearing No.IV/16/56/2012 EOU dated 11.07.2013 and also for a writ of mandamus -4- directing the respondents to permit destruction of 1310 MT of marble scrap. W.P.No.14988/2013 is filed for a direction to the appellants to allow de-bonding of the capital goods on payment of appropriate duty. W.P.14989/2013 was filed for setting aside the order passed by the Settlement Commission, Chennai.
4. Vide order dated 02.04.2013, the learned single Judge directed clubbing of all these cases. Accordingly, they were clubbed. Thereafter, interim orders have been passed by the Court below from time to time including the impugned order.
5. These appeals are preferred challenging the order passed on 05.09.2013. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. A perusal of the orders passed by the learned single Judge from time to time in these proceedings indicate that he is trying to find out the nature of investigation, the particulars of investigation, the documents which the appellants want from the respondent, the particulars of the summons in the criminal complaint filed in various cases, about the -5- nature of business the respondent is carrying on. He has also made certain observations against the authorities for not discharging their functions in a manner known to law. He has also drawn some adverse inference against the department. He has also gone into the question of limitation in initiating these proceedings.
6. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for both the parties that pleadings are completed in the writ petition. Therefore, we are of the view that when the writ petitions are ready for hearing, the proper course would be to hear the writ petitions on merits, so that rights of the parties are determined. An investigation has to be done by the authorities in accordance with law and if there is any defect in the enquiry so conducted, the person aggrieved can in any way challenge the same in a manner known to law. But when the investigation is on, calling upon the investigating agency to state the nature of investigation, the documents they want and to furnish the details and the intelligence gathered and also making observations on the nature that investigation conducted, is -6- unwarranted in the facts of this case. It is suffice to say that it would be not necessary for us to go into the details about the illegality of the order passed by the learned single Judge from time to time. In the interest of both the parties, the investigation is to be completed at the earliest. No one shall interfere with the said investigation including this Court. The observations made in this order shall not affect or hamper the investigation which is premature. In these circumstances, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order passed by the learned single Judge and make it clear that the investigation agency shall conduct the investigation in accordance with law without anyway getting influenced by the observations made in the impugned order or in the order passed earlier to that. The rights if any, of the respondent shall be decided by hearing the writ petition on merits expeditiously, that would meet the ends of justice. Hence, we pass the following order:
ORDER a. The appeals are allowed. -7- b. The impugned order is set aside. c. Now that five writ petitions are clubbed, they shall be heard and decided on merits and in accordance with law at the earliest.
d. Authorities shall continue with the
investigation and conclude the same
expeditiously and they shall not be influenced in any manner by the observations made in this writ appeals.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE nvj