Section 108 Customs statements can be substantive evidence, and corroboration is not always required for penal action.

Statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act were treated as substantive evidence capable of supporting penal action, and statements of co-noticees implicating the applicants could also be used against them. On that settled legal position, independent corroboration was not required to sustain reliance on those statements. The reference applications were therefore rejected because the proposed question was answered against the applicants.

---

---

Issues: Whether statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act could be relied upon as substantive evidence to sustain penal action in the absence of independent corroborative evidence.

Analysis: The issue was treated as settled by the Supreme Court authorities relied upon by the respondent. Statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act were held to be substantive evidence, and statements of co-noticees inculpating the applicants could also be used against them. In view of that settled position, the absence of independent corroboration did not invalidate reliance on such statements.

Conclusion: The reference applications were rejected, as the question proposed by the applicants was answered against them.

---