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.
The HC upheld the decision of the CESTAT, dismissing the appeal against the respondents regarding recovery of customs duty under Sections 28 and 147 of the Customs Act, 1962. The court found no basis to impose liability on the respondents for the wrongful acts of their agent, noting the respondents' demonstration of bona fide conduct through payment evidence. The statements implicating the agent in malafide activities were insufficient to extend liability to the principal importers under Section 147(2). As the appellant's contentions were confined to factual disputes resolved in favor of the respondents, no substantial question of law arose warranting interference. Consequently, the appellant's appeal was dismissed, affirming the Tribunal's order in favor of the respondents.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.