https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73847 In adjudicatory proceedings carrying penal consequences, reliance on third-party confessional statements requires a fair opportunity for cross-examination and proof that the statement is voluntary and true; denial of that opportunity vitiated the confiscation and penalty, leading to remand for re-enquiry. Penalties against other appellants could not be sustained where the show-cause notice lacked a precise charge linking them to the seized goods and the record contained no legal evidence beyond uncorroborated, retracted statements; those penalties were set aside. For the remaining appellants, the penalties were moderated on the facts proved, including limited participation and the restricted nature of the goods recovered. en-us Thu, 03 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Jun 2011 18:34:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73847 In adjudicatory proceedings carrying penal consequences, reliance on third-party confessional statements requires a fair opportunity for cross-examination and proof that the statement is voluntary and true; denial of that opportunity vitiated the confiscation and penalty, leading to remand for re-enquiry. Penalties against other appellants could not be sustained where the show-cause notice lacked a precise charge linking them to the seized goods and the record contained no legal evidence beyond uncorroborated, retracted statements; those penalties were set aside. For the remaining appellants, the penalties were moderated on the facts proved, including limited participation and the restricted nature of the goods recovered. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 03 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73847