9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 620X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant admitted attempting export of Muriate of Potash in the name of industrial salt. The supplier one Mr. Venkatesh Murthy of Arasikere also admitted that he had supplied Muriate of Potash only. Subsequently the goods had been auctioned by the Department and customers have purchased believing it Muriate of Potash. In the reports obtained to the Revenue from Agriculture Department, Government of Karnataka, it was indicated that the item under export is Muriate of Potash containing 59.88%, 63.04% of Potassium Chloride. 2. The learned advocate on behalf of the appellant submitted that in this case principles of natural justice were not observed and his request for documents were not acceded to. He submits that he had asked for a copy of lab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It was claimed that one Shri Venkatesh Murthy had supplied him industrial salt at his request. According to the records and the statements in the prison, the report of Agriculture Department of Government of Karnataka was shown to him and after the report was shown to him, he agreed that according to the report it was Muriate of Potash but still stuck to the statement what was exported was only industrial salt. Shri Venkatesh Murthy who has supplied the goods to the appellant also admitted that what was supplied is Muriate of Potash after seeing the report, however no questions were asked to Shri Venkatesh Murthy as to how and where he obtained the goods for supplying the same to the appellant. The ground taken by the appellant is that he w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dt. 06/09/2010, the learned counsel informed the Department that he had been duly instructed to give reply to the show-cause notice. The appellant took 6 months just to direct his advocate to give reply to the show-cause notice. Thereafter a reminder was sent on 14/12/2010 requiring the learned counsel to give reply. Once again vide letter dt. 18/01/2011, the appellant's counsel was asked to submit reply to the show-cause notice. In reply to this letter, the learned counsel on 24/01/2011 requested for supply of relied upon documents i.e. after 10 months. The interesting part is that in this letter even copy of the show-cause notice has been asked for. If there was no copy of the show-cause notice was available to the appellant, how he star ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have the annexures. 4. As regards the items that was exported under the guise of industrial salt, it is quite clear that Agriculture Department, Government of Karnataka treated it as only Muriate of Potash and buyers purchased the item in auction believing that it is Muriate of Potash and there is no evidence that they subsequently complained that it is not Muriate of Potash and the buyers also got the samples tested and even then they have not complained. It cannot be said that the Agriculture Department, Government of Karnataka officers did not know what is Muriate of Potash. Therefore, we do not find that the appellant has been able to make out prima facie case that what was exported was industrial salt and also entertained a bona fide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
