https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103984 Penalties under Section 112 of the Customs Act were held unsustainable where the Revenue relied mainly on a co-noticee's statement and the goods were not proved to be smuggled or illicitly imported. Foreign origin by itself was found insufficient to establish smuggling, and suspicion or absence of purchase records could not replace legal proof. In the absence of the statutory presumption under Section 123 or Chapter IVA, the Department had to adduce evidence of illicit import, and that initial burden was not discharged. The penalties were therefore set aside. en-us Wed, 06 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 25 Feb 2012 12:25:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103984 Penalties under Section 112 of the Customs Act were held unsustainable where the Revenue relied mainly on a co-noticee's statement and the goods were not proved to be smuggled or illicitly imported. Foreign origin by itself was found insufficient to establish smuggling, and suspicion or absence of purchase records could not replace legal proof. In the absence of the statutory presumption under Section 123 or Chapter IVA, the Department had to adduce evidence of illicit import, and that initial burden was not discharged. The penalties were therefore set aside. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 06 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103984