https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89536 Penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act is sustainable only where the person knew, or had reason to believe, that the goods were liable to confiscation. On the stated facts, the appellant was found not to have smuggled the goods and there was no evidence of conscious or mala fide possession. In the absence of the required knowledge or reason to believe, the penalty provision could not be invoked, and the penalty was held not sustainable. en-us Mon, 16 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Sep 2011 17:36:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89536 Penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act is sustainable only where the person knew, or had reason to believe, that the goods were liable to confiscation. On the stated facts, the appellant was found not to have smuggled the goods and there was no evidence of conscious or mala fide possession. In the absence of the required knowledge or reason to believe, the penalty provision could not be invoked, and the penalty was held not sustainable. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 16 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89536