https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118480 The court held a Preventive Officer in the Customs Department liable for penalty under Section 112(a) and (b) of the Customs Act, 1962, due to deliberate misrepresentation and fraud in relation to a shipment. Despite the officer's request for cross-examination being partially granted, a penalty of Rs 50,000 was imposed. The court emphasized the importance of following procedures outlined in the Customs Preventive Manual, particularly regarding warehousing practices. The refusal of adequate cross-examination was deemed a violation of natural justice, leading to the setting aside of the penalty order and a remand for further adjudication, considering the officer's submissions and jurisdiction under Section 155 of the Customs Act, 1962. en-us Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Jun 2012 18:39:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118480 The court held a Preventive Officer in the Customs Department liable for penalty under Section 112(a) and (b) of the Customs Act, 1962, due to deliberate misrepresentation and fraud in relation to a shipment. Despite the officer's request for cross-examination being partially granted, a penalty of Rs 50,000 was imposed. The court emphasized the importance of following procedures outlined in the Customs Preventive Manual, particularly regarding warehousing practices. The refusal of adequate cross-examination was deemed a violation of natural justice, leading to the setting aside of the penalty order and a remand for further adjudication, considering the officer's submissions and jurisdiction under Section 155 of the Customs Act, 1962. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118480