https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268691 Penalty under the Customs Act against customs officers requires evidence of aiding, abetting, or other culpable involvement; mere negligence in duty is insufficient. The record did not show that the officers acted for pecuniary gain or facilitated the alleged importers, and separate disciplinary consequences had already been imposed on one officer. On that basis, the penalty on Smt. Geeta V. Patil was held unsustainable and set aside, and no penalty was found imposable on the other departmental officers. en-us Fri, 09 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Nov 2015 23:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268691 Penalty under the Customs Act against customs officers requires evidence of aiding, abetting, or other culpable involvement; mere negligence in duty is insufficient. The record did not show that the officers acted for pecuniary gain or facilitated the alleged importers, and separate disciplinary consequences had already been imposed on one officer. On that basis, the penalty on Smt. Geeta V. Patil was held unsustainable and set aside, and no penalty was found imposable on the other departmental officers. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 09 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268691