Transporter liability for alleged smuggling assistance failed where the importer had filed a baggage declaration.

Liability under the Customs Act penalty provision could not be sustained where the adjudicating authority itself found that the goods were warehoused and the importer had filed a baggage declaration for clearance of unaccompanied baggage. That finding displaced the foundational allegation that no baggage declaration had been made, so the cited precedent did not fit the facts. On that basis, the transporter could not be fastened with liability for alleged assistance in smuggling under the penal provision invoked, and the appellant was held not liable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the transporter could be held liable under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 for alleged assistance in smuggling when the importer had filed a baggage declaration.

Analysis: The adjudicating authority had recorded that the goods were warehoused and that the importer had filed a baggage declaration for clearance of unaccompanied baggage. In view of that finding, the foundational allegation that the importer had not filed any baggage declaration did not survive. On that basis, the reliance placed on the cited precedent was found inapposite to the facts of the case, and the transporter could not be fastened with liability under the penal provision invoked.

Conclusion: The appellant was not liable under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962.

---