Protection to Customs Officer under Section 155(2) of the Customs Act 1962 - Applicability of the case law under Section 40(2) of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944, after amending it in 1973.

  That after Amendment of Section 40(1) and Section 40 (2) of the Central Excise and Salt Act 1944 as given below, there is change in the scope of suit under Section 40(2) and not in for Prosecution. 

 After Amendment, Suit can be filed against officers without any time limit.

 But for prosecution, time limit is reduced from 6 months to 3 months. And also the condition of one month prior notice is also introduced.

The detailed analysis  is below:

. Section 40 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 reads as under:- 

"40. Bar of suits and limitation of suits and other legal proceedings.- 

(1) No suit shall lie against the Central Government or against any officer of the Government in respect of any order passed in good faith or any act in good faith done or ordered to be done under this Act.

 (2) No suit, prosecution, or other legal proceeding shall be instituted for anything done or ordered to be done under this Act after the expiration of six months from the accrual of the cause of action or from the date of the act or order complained of." 

Section 40 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 as amended with effect from 01.09.1973 reads as under:-

 "40. Protection of action taken under the Act.- 

(1) No suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against the Central Government or any officer of the Central Government or a State Government for anything which is done, or intended to be done, in good faith, in pursuance of this Act or any rule made thereunder.

 (2) No proceeding, other than a suit, shall be commenced against the Central Government or any officer of the Central Government or a State Government for anything done or purported to have been done in pursuance of this Act or any rule made thereunder, without giving the Central Government or such officer a month's previous notice in writing of the intended proceeding and of the cause thereof or after the expiration of three months from the accrual of such cause.

Analysis of the Amendment to Section 40 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944

The amendment to Section 40 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944, effective from 01.09.1973, introduced significant changes to the scope and applicability of legal protections and time limitations for suits, prosecutions, and other legal proceedings against government officers and the Central Government. Below is a detailed analysis:

---

1. Pre-Amendment Provisions (Before 01.09.1973)

Key Features of Section 40 (Pre-Amendment):

1. Subsection (1):
• Prohibited suits against the Central Government or officers for any act done in good faith under the Act.
• This subsection provided absolute immunity for acts done in good faith.
2. Subsection (2):
• Barred the institution of suits, prosecutions, or other legal proceedings for acts done under the Act after six months from the accrual of the cause of action.
• This imposed a time limitation on all forms of legal action, including suits, prosecutions, and other proceedings.

Scope of Protection (Pre-Amendment):

• Both suits and prosecutions were subject to a strict time limitation of six months.
• Immunity under Subsection (1) applied only to acts done in good faith.

---

2. Post-Amendment Provisions (Effective from 01.09.1973)

Key Features of Section 40 (Post-Amendment):

1. Subsection (1):
• Expanded the scope of protection to include suits, prosecutions, and other legal proceedings for acts done or intended to be done in good faith under the Act or its rules.
• This subsection continues to provide absolute immunity for actions done in good faith.
2. Subsection (2):
• Introduced a distinction between suits , Prosecutions, and other legal proceedings:
• Suits: No time limitation was prescribed. A suit can now be filed at any time, subject to other applicable laws.
• Prosecutions and Other Legal Proceedings:
• Require a one-month prior notice before initiation.
• Must be initiated within three months of the accrual of the cause of action.

Scope of Protection (Post-Amendment):

• Suits: No longer subject to a time limitation under Section 40(2).
• Prosecutions and Other Proceedings:
• Time limitation reduced from six months to three months.
• Additional procedural requirement of a one-month notice was introduced.

---

3. Comparative Analysis: Change in Scope

Impact on Suits:

• Pre-Amendment: Suits were barred if not filed within six months from the accrual of the cause of action.
• Post-Amendment: No time limitation is prescribed for suits under Section 40(2). This means that suits can now be filed against officers and the government at any time, subject to other general limitations under the Limitation Act, 1963.

Impact on Prosecutions:

• Pre-Amendment: Prosecutions had to be initiated within six months of the cause of action.
• Post-Amendment: Prosecutions must now be initiated within three months of the cause of action, and a one-month prior notice is mandatory.

Other Legal Proceedings:

• The amendment introduced the same procedural requirements (one-month notice and three-month limitation) for "other legal proceedings" as for prosecutions.

---

4. Judicial Interpretation and Case Law

1. Assistant Collector of Central Excise v. Ramdev Tobacco Company:
• The Supreme Court clarified that time limitations under Section 40(2) (pre-amendment) applied equally to suits, prosecutions, and other legal proceedings.
2. State of Gujarat v. Patel Raghav Natha (1970):
• The Court emphasized the importance of time limitations in protecting officers from protracted litigation.
3. Post-Amendment Cases:
• Courts have recognized that the removal of the time limitation for suits reflects the legislature's intent to provide flexibility for civil remedies while maintaining strict procedural safeguards for prosecutions and other proceedings.

---

5. Conclusion

The amendment to Section 40 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944, brought about a clear change in the scope of suits under Subsection (2):

• Suits: No longer subject to a time limitation under Section 40(2). This allows individuals to file suits against officers or the government without restriction under this section.
• Prosecutions and Other Proceedings: Continue to be time-barred, with the limitation period reduced to three months and a procedural requirement of a one-month notice introduced.

This distinction reflects the legislature's intent to balance accountability for officers with protections against frivolous or delayed criminal prosecutions

( Chatgpt response )