https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94185 Confiscation of a vessel under Section 115(2) of the Customs Act was held unsustainable where the statute linked liability to precautions specified in rules, but no such rules had been framed; the confiscation was set aside. Penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act operated independently of confiscation and was supported by statements and Section 108 evidence, so the penalty was sustained in principle but reduced on the facts. The fine under the Gold (Control) Act was not sustained and was deleted. en-us Wed, 29 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Nov 2011 16:27:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94185 Confiscation of a vessel under Section 115(2) of the Customs Act was held unsustainable where the statute linked liability to precautions specified in rules, but no such rules had been framed; the confiscation was set aside. Penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act operated independently of confiscation and was supported by statements and Section 108 evidence, so the penalty was sustained in principle but reduced on the facts. The fine under the Gold (Control) Act was not sustained and was deleted. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 29 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94185