1992 (2) TMI 331

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e allegation that the petitioner had committed offences covered by clauses (b) and (d) of section 10 of the Central Act. Allegations were that the petitioner purchased aluminium cover for bincards, gunny bags, tanker, tarpaulins, mercury, paints and zinc dust valued at Rs. 16,99,919.60 at the concessional rate of tax by issue of declaration in form "C", but the items were either not covered in its registration certificate, or were not used for the purposes enumerated in clause (b)/(c)/(d) of sub-section (3) of section 8. It was found that the petitioner after having purchased mercury for use in the manufacturing process, resold the same. Use of declarations in form "C" was thus held to be unauthorised, and as afore-indicated penalty under s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Additional Commissioner was not justified in maintaining the penalty impugned. Once it is accepted that there was absence of mens rea, resort to penal provision would not be proper unless it is established that the conduct of the assessee was contumacious or that there was deliberate defiance of the statutory provisions, or wilful disregard thereof. Mens rea plays a very vital role for determination of the question whether penalty is to be imposed on a particular goods. "Mens rea" means some blameworthy mental condition whether constituted by knowledge or intention or otherwise. The doctrine of mens rea is not abstruse. The principle is stated in the maxim: "actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea" or "an act does not make one guilty un....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....absence of mens rea, circumstances do not warrant imposition of penalty so far as transactions in mercury are concerned. 5.. So far as other items are concerned, no satisfactory explanation was offered either before the authorities or before us. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that proceedings were initiated for alleged violation under section 10(b), but there was no contravention because the goods were included in the certificate of registration. We find no substance, because proceedings were initiated both in regard to contraventions covered by section 10(b) and section 10(d). It is not in dispute that the ingredients of section 10(d) are attracted, but absence of mens rea is pleaded by the petitioner. The gist of the of....