Evidentiary burden in customs penalty cases: co-accused statements alone were insufficient to sustain personal liability.

Personal penalty for alleged unauthorised importation of raw silk was held unsustainable where the case rested mainly on a co-accused clearing agent's statement and the appellant's Section 108 Customs Act statement denied involvement. The earlier exoneration on the same allegations had already found the evidentiary basis insufficient, and no just or tangible material was available on the record to prove participation. The penalty was therefore set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the personal penalty imposed on the appellant for alleged involvement in the unauthorised importation of raw silk was sustainable on the basis of the materials on record.

Analysis: The appellant's alleged role rested primarily on a statement attributed to a co-accused representative of the clearing agent, while the appellant had also made a statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 denying the allegations. The earlier order concerning the same allegations had exonerated the appellant, and the evidentiary basis relied upon there had not been found sufficient. On the record in the present matter, no just or tangible evidence was found to establish the appellant's participation so as to justify the penalty.

Conclusion: The penalty was unsustainable and was set aside in favour of the appellant.

---