https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92429 Penalty under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act was held unsustainable where the goods were confiscated only for breach of exemption conditions and Chapter IVA requirements, and not for prohibited import under Section 111(d). Although the import was arranged through the appellant firm and the consignee filed the bill of entry on a high sea sale basis, the record did not establish beyond doubt any act or omission by either appellant that rendered the goods liable to confiscation under the invoked provisions. There was also no clear finding that the high sea sale was fictitious or that the appellants had stored or disposed of the goods in Bombay. The penalties were therefore set aside. en-us Thu, 09 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Nov 2011 15:49:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92429 Penalty under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act was held unsustainable where the goods were confiscated only for breach of exemption conditions and Chapter IVA requirements, and not for prohibited import under Section 111(d). Although the import was arranged through the appellant firm and the consignee filed the bill of entry on a high sea sale basis, the record did not establish beyond doubt any act or omission by either appellant that rendered the goods liable to confiscation under the invoked provisions. There was also no clear finding that the high sea sale was fictitious or that the appellants had stored or disposed of the goods in Bombay. The penalties were therefore set aside. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 09 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92429