N.D. Ojha, J. - (1.) THESE four writ petitions raise common questions and as such are being decided together.
(2.) THE account books of the petitioner, in of the writ petitions have been seized and the petitioner Ms been served, with a notice to show cause as to why excise duty may not believed on it. The account book as well as goods of the petitioners in two of the writ petition have been seized and similar show cause notices have been served on them, In the fourth writ petition some goods have been seized and" the prayers is may be directed, to be returned and the respondents may be restrained from imposing any Excise Duty on the petitioner. A perusal of the notices to show cause indicates that the case of the respondents is that the petitioners have, been manufacturing excisable commodities valued at crores have been 'selling the same without payment of excise duty. The book of accounts which have been seized are apparently being retained as evidence to substantiate the aforesaid case of the respondents and to facilitate the proceedings for levy of excise duty. As regards the notices issued to the petitioners to show cause as to why excise duty may not be levied on the goods manufactured by them and the goods seized may not be confiscated suffice it to say that in case the petitioners are manufacturers of the on which excise duty is payable by them, the notices issued to the petitioners to show cause, cannot " be said to be without jurisdiction. The case of the petitioners is that they are hot manufacturers of any excisable goods and are not liable to pay excise duty. The proper course for them, in our opinion, is to show cause in pursuance of the impugned notices.
(3.) IT was urged by the counsel for the petitioners that the respondents had no jurisdiction to seize only the account, books. According to him account books could be seized only if goods were also seized and the proper officer had reason to believe that the goods were liable to be confiscated. It has not been disputed before us that the provisions of Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 are applicable in regard to search and seizure under the Central Excises and Salt Act, in view of the provisions contained in this behalf in Section 12 of the Act read with Section 8 of the General Clauses Act. Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 reads as follows: - 110. Seizure of goods, documents and things, -(1) If the proper officer has reason to believe that any goods are liable to confiscation under this Act, he may seize such goods : Provided that where it is not practicable to seize any such goods, the proper officer may serve on the owner of the goods an order that he shall not remove, part with, or otherwise deal with the goods except with the previous permission of such officer. (2) Where any goods are seized, under in respect thereof is given under clause months of the seizure of the goods, the goods person from whose possession they were seized Provided that the aforesaid period of six months may, on sufficient Cause being shown, be extended by the Collector of Customs for a period not exceeding six months. (3) The proper officer may size any documents or things which, in his opinion, will be useful for, or relevant to, any proceedings under this Act. (4) The person from whose custody any documents are seized under Sub -section (3) shall be entitled to make copies thereof of take extracts therefrom in the presence of an officer of customs." Sub -section (1), as mentioned above, applies to seizure of goods and 'goods can be seized if the proper officer has reason to believe that the goods are liable to confiscation. Sub -section (3) however, does not contain any such restriction on the power of the proper officer. The Sub -section section empowers the proper officer to seize documents "which, in his opinion, will be useful for, or relevant to, any proceedings under this Act". Since Section 110 of the Customs Act has been made applicable to the Central Excises and Salt Act, wherever the words "under this Act" occur in Section 110 of the Customs Act, they will have to be read as if they refer to the Central Excises and Salt Act. ;