9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (7) TMI 176X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nalty by Commissioner of Customs (Exports) by OIO 3133/04 dated 30-9-2004. The appellants were directors of a Company M/s. Pharmed Chemicals. They had imported raw materials under DEEC Scheme for manufacture of final products and for exporting the same. The appellants could not fulfil the export obligation due to several factors including the closure of the unit. All the export orders were cancell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... circumstances. (1) Dencap Electronics Pvt Ltd. v. CCE, Goa - 2004 (174) E.L.T. 241 (Tri.-Bang.) It has been held in this case that in the absence of mens rea, penalty is not imposable for non-fulfilment of the export obligation. This judgment relied on early ruling on same facts and circumstances rendered in the case of Dyna Lamps aad Glass Works Ltd. v. Commissioner - 2003 (157) E.L.T. 73 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ants had no mens rea in not fulfilling export obligations. The High Court by their order dated 9-6-2004 directed for liquidation of the Company as they were unable to fulfil the export obligation as the export orders had been cancelled. In view of these circumstances, it cannot be said that the appellant has not fulfilled the export obligation with a view to enrich themselves. The ruling cited by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
