https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1327 The Tribunal allowed the rectification of a mistake in its Final Order and reduced the penalty to Rs. 50,000 for destroyed goods not consumed in the DTA. It held that penalties under Section 112 of the Customs Act can be imposed even when no duty is demanded on goods liable for confiscation. The Tribunal also upheld the penalty on the partnership firm, citing vicarious liability for the acts of its partners/employees. The allegation of attempted bribery was dismissed. The appeal was disposed of in accordance with these findings. en-us Fri, 01 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Apr 2008 16:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1327 The Tribunal allowed the rectification of a mistake in its Final Order and reduced the penalty to Rs. 50,000 for destroyed goods not consumed in the DTA. It held that penalties under Section 112 of the Customs Act can be imposed even when no duty is demanded on goods liable for confiscation. The Tribunal also upheld the penalty on the partnership firm, citing vicarious liability for the acts of its partners/employees. The allegation of attempted bribery was dismissed. The appeal was disposed of in accordance with these findings. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 01 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1327