Court overturns penalties on appellants due to unreliable evidence, granting relief under Customs Act.

The court set aside the personal penalties imposed on two appellants under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. The judge found the penalties unsustainable due to reliance on unreliable co-accused statements without independent corroboration. The ambiguity in identifying one appellant and lack of evidence connecting them to illicit activities led to the penalties being overturned. Both appellants were granted relief, with the judge ruling in their favor and resolving the issue of personal penalties under the Customs Act in this case.

---

---

Issues:
Imposition of personal penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 on two appellants based on the same impugned Order of the Commissioner of Customs.

Analysis:
The judgment involves the imposition of personal penalties on two appellants under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. The case originated when Shri Khirod Mohan Sarkar was apprehended with a significant amount of Indian currency, claiming it was received in exchange for gold from a person named Sadhan. Investigations revealed discrepancies in identities and connections, leading to the issuance of show cause notices. The appellant, Shyamal Mazumdar, denied involvement and argued lack of evidence linking him to the transactions. Despite this, the adjudicating authority imposed a personal penalty of Rs. 1.00 lakh on each appellant.

In the appeal, Shyamal Mazumdar's representative contended that the penalty was unjust as the evidence provided by Shri Khirod Mohan Sarkar was unreliable, emphasizing the lack of proof connecting Shyamal Mazumdar to the illicit activities. The representative cited the absence of efforts by the Revenue to establish the identity of Sadhan and highlighted contradictions in statements. Additionally, the representative referenced legal precedents to support the argument against the penalty's validity.

Upon review, the judge noted discrepancies in the impugned Order, particularly the ambiguity surrounding the identity of the appellant Shyamal Mazumdar, referred to as 'S. Mazumdar' without clarification. The judge criticized the reliance on the sole statement of Shri Khirod Mohan Sarkar, an unreliable co-accused, as the basis for imposing the penalty on Shyamal Mazumdar. Consequently, the judge found the penalty unsustainable and ruled in favor of Shyamal Mazumdar, setting aside the penalty imposed on him.

Regarding the second appellant, Sankar Paul, the judge observed that the penalty was solely based on the statement of Shri Khirod Mohan Sarkar, lacking independent corroboration. As a result, the judge extended the benefit of the doubt to Sankar Paul and overturned the penalty imposed on him. Ultimately, both appeals were allowed, providing consequential reliefs to the appellants, thereby resolving the issue of personal penalties under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 in their favor.

---