Personal penalty under Customs law requires conscious participation in the offence; mere goods unavailability cannot justify it.

Personal penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act requires a finding of conscious participation in the act rendering goods liable to confiscation under Section 111. A penalty in personam cannot be sustained merely because the goods are unavailable for confiscation, and such absence does not justify substituting personal penalties or redemption fine. On the record, there was no material to show that the under-valuation was contrived by the appellants or that they were privy to the relevant dealings, so the personal penalties were unsustainable and were set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether personal penalties under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 could be sustained in the absence of a finding that the importers were personally involved in the act rendering the goods liable to confiscation under Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis: Personal penalty is a penalty in personam and requires a finding of conscious participation in the illegal or irregular act. Mere non-availability of the goods for confiscation did not justify substituting personal penalties or redemption fine. The record did not show that the under-valuation was contrived by the appellants or that they were privy to the relevant dealings.

Conclusion: The personal penalties were unsustainable and were set aside.

---