https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119653 The court upheld the seizure and confiscation of imported yarn due to lack of proper duty paying documents. Despite the appellant's claim of the yarn being indigenous, evidence was dismissed, confirming its foreign origin. The appellant's possession without proof of duty payment led to imposition of penalties and fines under the Customs Act. While duty could not be demanded as they were not importers, redemption of goods under Section 125 made them liable. The court rejected the appeal, emphasizing the liability of the proprietor and firm in a proprietary firm for penalties and duties. en-us Thu, 04 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Jul 2012 13:42:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119653 The court upheld the seizure and confiscation of imported yarn due to lack of proper duty paying documents. Despite the appellant's claim of the yarn being indigenous, evidence was dismissed, confirming its foreign origin. The appellant's possession without proof of duty payment led to imposition of penalties and fines under the Customs Act. While duty could not be demanded as they were not importers, redemption of goods under Section 125 made them liable. The court rejected the appeal, emphasizing the liability of the proprietor and firm in a proprietary firm for penalties and duties. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 04 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119653