https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126414 Penalty under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act attaches only where a person knowingly acquires or deals with goods believed to be liable to confiscation. On the facts, the company was not separately shown to have had the requisite knowledge or conscious dealing, so it was not liable; the broker was engaged only in post-import sale activity and commission receipt, with no proof of knowledge of confiscability, so he was also exonerated. Shri Ashok Wadia, however, had knowledge that the vehicle was liable to confiscation and had acknowledged the liability, so penalty was upheld against him. The matter was remitted only for determination of the quantum of penalty. en-us Thu, 28 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Nov 2012 14:18:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126414 Penalty under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act attaches only where a person knowingly acquires or deals with goods believed to be liable to confiscation. On the facts, the company was not separately shown to have had the requisite knowledge or conscious dealing, so it was not liable; the broker was engaged only in post-import sale activity and commission receipt, with no proof of knowledge of confiscability, so he was also exonerated. Shri Ashok Wadia, however, had knowledge that the vehicle was liable to confiscation and had acknowledged the liability, so penalty was upheld against him. The matter was remitted only for determination of the quantum of penalty. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 28 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126414