Penalty for aiding and abetting wrongful import upheld where statements showed active facilitation of clearance and duty evasion.

Penalty under the Customs Act was sustained where the appellant's own initial statement, corroborated by the importer's statement, showed that he organised the import, used the importer's passport for TR concession, arranged clearance through the CHA, collected funds for duty payment, and facilitated dealings in the car. The later retraction was treated as an afterthought and rejected. On these facts, the appellant was found to have actively aided and abetted the wrongful import, so the penalty remained valid and the appeal failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under the Customs Act was sustainable against the appellant for his in the wrongful import of the car and evasion of duty.

Analysis: The appellant's own initial statement showed that he had organised the import, used the importer's passport for the TR concession, arranged the clearance through the CHA, collected funds for duty payment, and facilitated subsequent dealings in the car. The importer's statement corroborated this version. The later retraction was treated as an afterthought and was discarded. On these facts, the appellant was found to have actively aided and abetted the wrongful import.

Conclusion: The penalty under the Customs Act was held sustainable and the appeal failed.

---