https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112816 The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 112(b) for unauthorized removal of goods from port premises. Despite the appellant's admission of acting for monetary gain, discrepancies in statements and the possibility of coercion led the Tribunal to conclude that evidence did not establish voluntary participation. The decision underscores the importance of ensuring statements are voluntary and not extracted under duress, emphasizing the necessity of clear proof of voluntary involvement in illegal activities to impose penalties. The meticulous analysis by the Tribunal resulted in the appellant's appeal being allowed. en-us Fri, 05 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 May 2012 18:30:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112816 The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 112(b) for unauthorized removal of goods from port premises. Despite the appellant's admission of acting for monetary gain, discrepancies in statements and the possibility of coercion led the Tribunal to conclude that evidence did not establish voluntary participation. The decision underscores the importance of ensuring statements are voluntary and not extracted under duress, emphasizing the necessity of clear proof of voluntary involvement in illegal activities to impose penalties. The meticulous analysis by the Tribunal resulted in the appellant's appeal being allowed. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 05 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112816