9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (6) TMI 58X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... andla Free Trade Zone (KAFTZ) was lying in-operative since long and the said imported goods were found unutilised for a period of over one year from the date of its import. Accordingly, show cause notices were issued to the appellants as to why duty on the said imported goods be not charged, the said goods be not confiscated and penalty be not imposed on them. 2.3 The appellants, however, submitted that the goods were duly utilised by them and off-highway trucks were assembled from such parts. They however, could not be exported on account of some dispute regarding the value addition between the appellants and the Development Commissioner of Zone/Ministry of Commerce. According to the appellants, they were insisting on 10% value addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... value addition of 30% has held up the goods from exportation. This is something beyond the control of the appellants. In the circumstances, no mens rea could be attributed to the appellants for not undertaking the export of the goods after utilising the imported goods in the resultant product of off-highway trucks; export could not be made because of the subsisting dispute between the appellants and the Development Commissioner of the KAFTZ. In these circumstances, imposition of penalty and confiscation of goods is not at all warranted. 4. Learned JDR, Shri K.K. Dutta, on the other hand reiterates the findings of the adjudicating authority. He submits that enough time has been given to the importers/appellants to utilise the goods in exp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellants in support of their contention that Development Commissioner, KAFTZ had agreed to 10% value addition at the time of importation of the goods and later on this value addition was increased to 30%. Accordingly, we do not find any substance in this plea and therefore, we do not see any reason as to why the exportation of goods could not take place even after such a long period as in these cases. Therefore, there has been a violation of the conditions of General Wareshousing Bond as well as of Notification 77/80 or its predecessor notification. Mens rea in not exporting the goods over such a long period is found in the facts and circumstances of this case. No extenuating circumstances have been advanced and substantiated; as already ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
