In Brief
A cosmetics company sought to quash criminal proceedings alleging it had evaded countervailing duty by not declaring MRP (Maximum Retail Price) of goods. The company had obtained immunity through the Settlement Commission and the Customs appellate authority determined no fiscal liability existed. The Supreme Court held that immunity granted under the Central Excise and Customs Acts bars subsequent prosecution; FIR registration does not constitute initiation of proceedings—only Court cognizance does. When the factual foundation of charges vanishes and immunity is validly granted, continuing prosecution is abuse of process. The Court quashed the proceedings and criminal case against the company.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.