https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122068 The Tribunal found that the appellant genuinely believed they ordered 16.600 M.T. of cloves based on supplier documents, leading to a declaration error. While the excess quantity triggered confiscation, the Tribunal considered the appellant's lack of awareness and the supplier's responsibility, reducing the redemption fine. As the appellant had no role in the excess quantity receipt and was unaware of it, the penalty under Section 112 was deemed unwarranted. The penalty imposed on the appellant was set aside, and the appeal was partially allowed by modifying the impugned order. en-us Mon, 14 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Aug 2012 13:26:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122068 The Tribunal found that the appellant genuinely believed they ordered 16.600 M.T. of cloves based on supplier documents, leading to a declaration error. While the excess quantity triggered confiscation, the Tribunal considered the appellant's lack of awareness and the supplier's responsibility, reducing the redemption fine. As the appellant had no role in the excess quantity receipt and was unaware of it, the penalty under Section 112 was deemed unwarranted. The penalty imposed on the appellant was set aside, and the appeal was partially allowed by modifying the impugned order. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 14 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122068