https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208317 A retracted inculpatory statement could not sustain penalty for abetment of smuggling when the witnesses were not produced for cross-examination, the statements lacked reliable corroboration, and the mahazar could not itself convert them into voluntary evidence. In the absence of independent material showing participation in clearing the passenger or abetting the offence, the penalty was found unsustainable. Separately, where the impugned order recorded no finding linking the appellant to the smuggling transaction, the penalty could not stand and was annulled. The ratio affirms that retracted statements require voluntariness and independent corroboration before penalty can be imposed. en-us Thu, 28 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Jan 2012 12:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208317 A retracted inculpatory statement could not sustain penalty for abetment of smuggling when the witnesses were not produced for cross-examination, the statements lacked reliable corroboration, and the mahazar could not itself convert them into voluntary evidence. In the absence of independent material showing participation in clearing the passenger or abetting the offence, the penalty was found unsustainable. Separately, where the impugned order recorded no finding linking the appellant to the smuggling transaction, the penalty could not stand and was annulled. The ratio affirms that retracted statements require voluntariness and independent corroboration before penalty can be imposed. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 28 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208317