https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87728 Penalty for alleged abetment of smuggling against a Customs House Agent cannot be sustained unless the notice and adjudication orders identify the specific act or omission constituting abetment. Where the charge is founded only on general regulatory responsibilities, without a concrete factual basis showing breach of duty or participation in the smuggling activity, penalty under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 is not supported. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication, with liberty to the department to lead evidence and a direction to pass a speaking order after hearing the Customs House Agent. en-us Thu, 04 May 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Sep 2011 18:52:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87728 Penalty for alleged abetment of smuggling against a Customs House Agent cannot be sustained unless the notice and adjudication orders identify the specific act or omission constituting abetment. Where the charge is founded only on general regulatory responsibilities, without a concrete factual basis showing breach of duty or participation in the smuggling activity, penalty under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 is not supported. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication, with liberty to the department to lead evidence and a direction to pass a speaking order after hearing the Customs House Agent. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 04 May 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87728