Penalty under Customs law requires evidence linking the person to the imported goods; assumption alone is insufficient.

Penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 cannot be sustained unless there is evidence connecting the person with the imported goods. Where the record contains no material linking the appellant to the imported consignment, and the finding of a fictitious firm rests only on assumption, the penalty is unsupportable. On that basis, the impugned penalty was set aside and the appeal succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether the penalty imposed under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 could be sustained in the absence of evidence linking the appellant with the imported goods.

Analysis: The record did not disclose any material connecting the appellant with the imported consignment. The conclusion that the goods were imported by a fictitious firm was based on assumption, and not on proved facts establishing the appellant's involvement in the importation.

Conclusion: The penalty could not be imposed on the appellant on the basis of assumption, and the appeal was entitled to succeed.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside to the extent it imposed penalty on the appellant, and the appeal was allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: A penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 cannot be sustained without evidence establishing the appellant's link with the imported goods.

---