https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74277 Penalty under customs or gold-control law cannot be sustained without independent findings of the relevant contravention and reliable proof of the appellant's nexus with the offending goods. The Gold (Control) Act penalty failed because the adjudicating authority merely reproduced the Customs order, identified no specific Gold Control violation, and recorded no evidence that the appellant possessed primary gold. The Customs Act penalty also failed because it rested chiefly on an uncorroborated and later contradicted statement of a co-noticee, with no supporting recovery, independent witness, or other reliable material linking the appellant to the seized gold or currency. Both penalties were therefore set aside. en-us Wed, 26 Oct 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Feb 2012 17:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74277 Penalty under customs or gold-control law cannot be sustained without independent findings of the relevant contravention and reliable proof of the appellant's nexus with the offending goods. The Gold (Control) Act penalty failed because the adjudicating authority merely reproduced the Customs order, identified no specific Gold Control violation, and recorded no evidence that the appellant possessed primary gold. The Customs Act penalty also failed because it rested chiefly on an uncorroborated and later contradicted statement of a co-noticee, with no supporting recovery, independent witness, or other reliable material linking the appellant to the seized gold or currency. Both penalties were therefore set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 26 Oct 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74277