https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91705 Confiscation of a container under Section 115 of the Customs Act requires material showing that the person concerned had knowledge of, or culpable involvement in, the transport of goods liable to confiscation; mere allotment of the container in the ordinary course of business was insufficient. On the stated facts, the container agent had no shown awareness that it would be used for tainted goods, so confiscation was not justified. Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules likewise required knowledge or culpable conduct; mere negligence was not enough. Accordingly, the confiscation and penalty were set aside. en-us Mon, 21 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Oct 2011 13:03:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91705 Confiscation of a container under Section 115 of the Customs Act requires material showing that the person concerned had knowledge of, or culpable involvement in, the transport of goods liable to confiscation; mere allotment of the container in the ordinary course of business was insufficient. On the stated facts, the container agent had no shown awareness that it would be used for tainted goods, so confiscation was not justified. Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules likewise required knowledge or culpable conduct; mere negligence was not enough. Accordingly, the confiscation and penalty were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 21 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91705