https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112634 The vessel involved in smuggling gold was intercepted at sea, leading to the confiscation of the gold and the vessel under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act. The owner, despite claiming lack of involvement, was held liable for the smuggling attempt as the gold was concealed in the vessel's diesel tanks. The owner's absence during proceedings resulted in the dismissal of the appeal, with the tribunal deciding the case based on the respondent's arguments. The appellant's failure to participate ultimately led to the dismissal of the appeal. en-us Tue, 21 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 May 2012 10:22:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112634 The vessel involved in smuggling gold was intercepted at sea, leading to the confiscation of the gold and the vessel under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act. The owner, despite claiming lack of involvement, was held liable for the smuggling attempt as the gold was concealed in the vessel's diesel tanks. The owner's absence during proceedings resulted in the dismissal of the appeal, with the tribunal deciding the case based on the respondent's arguments. The appellant's failure to participate ultimately led to the dismissal of the appeal. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 21 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112634