Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Imposition of penalty u/s 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 - fraudulent import in the name of dummy IECs with mis-declaration in description and value inputs - Abetment - The tribunal held that, the appellant’s own statement afford sufficient corroboration to those statements. Cross-examination is vital for meeting out the allegations But when there is sufficient corroboration to those allegations, denial of cross-examination cannot be held prejudicial - there are sufficient ingredients for commission of offence by the appellant. - Demand with penalties confirmed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.