Retracted customs confession and uncorroborated statements cannot alone sustain penalty without independent corroborative evidence.

A customs penalty cannot rest solely on a retracted statement and an uncorroborated co-noticee or carrier statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal noted that the appellant's statement was retracted at the earliest opportunity, the other statements did not consistently support the allegation, and no independent material such as recovery, document trail, or other corroboration linked the appellant to the alleged smuggling. It further stated that statements under Section 108 must meet minimum safeguards of voluntariness and reliability. On that basis, the penalty was held not sustainable in law and was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the penalty imposed on the appellant under the Customs Act, 1962 could be sustained when it rested mainly on statements of the carrier and co-noticee, where the appellant's own statement was retracted at the earliest opportunity and no independent corroborative evidence was produced.

Analysis: The Tribunal found that the case against the appellant depended on recorded statements under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962. The statement implicating the appellant was retracted before the Magistrate at the first available opportunity, and the other statements did not consistently support the same version of events. No independent material such as recovery, document trail, or other corroboration was produced to connect the appellant with the alleged smuggling activity. The Tribunal also held that a retracted confession and uncorroborated statement of a co-accused cannot, by themselves, form the sole basis for penalty, and that statements recorded under Section 108 must satisfy the minimum safeguards of voluntariness and reliability.

Conclusion: The penalty was not sustainable in law and was set aside in favour of the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi: A retracted confessional statement and an uncorroborated co-accused statement cannot constitute sufficient evidence for imposing customs penalty unless supported by independent corroborative material and reliable compliance with the statutory statement-recording procedure.

---