https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106747 A retracted, uncross-examined statement unsupported by independent corroboration was insufficient to sustain penalty under the Customs Act, so the penalty against Sharad Dugar was set aside. By contrast, where a person admitted filing the shipping bill, misdescribing antiques as handicraft goods, and that admission was corroborated by customs evidence and an expert report, penalty under Section 114(i) was justified against Girish Dhawan. The penalty was upheld on liability but reduced on quantum in view of the facts and circumstances. The governing principle is that a penal finding requires reliable corroborative material, while a voluntary statement supported by evidence can sustain customs penalty. en-us Tue, 01 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Mar 2012 15:10:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106747 A retracted, uncross-examined statement unsupported by independent corroboration was insufficient to sustain penalty under the Customs Act, so the penalty against Sharad Dugar was set aside. By contrast, where a person admitted filing the shipping bill, misdescribing antiques as handicraft goods, and that admission was corroborated by customs evidence and an expert report, penalty under Section 114(i) was justified against Girish Dhawan. The penalty was upheld on liability but reduced on quantum in view of the facts and circumstances. The governing principle is that a penal finding requires reliable corroborative material, while a voluntary statement supported by evidence can sustain customs penalty. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 01 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=106747