https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118402 Penalty for abetment of a fraudulent export cannot be sustained unless cogent evidence links the CHA or its representative to the preparation, filing, or arrangement of the shipping bills and the offending act itself. Where the record showed only the CHA seal, no signatures by the firm or its employees, and a bare reference in an untested statement, the evidentiary basis was insufficient to establish complicity under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. The cited CHA licensing regulations did not alter that result because no material connected them to the alleged offence. en-us Fri, 19 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Jun 2012 14:36:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118402 Penalty for abetment of a fraudulent export cannot be sustained unless cogent evidence links the CHA or its representative to the preparation, filing, or arrangement of the shipping bills and the offending act itself. Where the record showed only the CHA seal, no signatures by the firm or its employees, and a bare reference in an untested statement, the evidentiary basis was insufficient to establish complicity under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. The cited CHA licensing regulations did not alter that result because no material connected them to the alleged offence. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 19 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118402