https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328998 Penalty under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act was held unsustainable where the same facts had already led to acquittal in the connected criminal case, affirmed on appeal, and the department relied on no independent evidence in adjudication. Although criminal and departmental proceedings are distinct, the material was identical in both proceedings, the appellant's explanation for possession of the foreign currency remained consistent, and the department failed to prove the alleged third person's role or any abetment. In the absence of corroborative evidence, the evidentiary basis for penalty was not established, and the penalty was set aside. en-us Fri, 13 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Feb 2017 17:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328998 Penalty under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act was held unsustainable where the same facts had already led to acquittal in the connected criminal case, affirmed on appeal, and the department relied on no independent evidence in adjudication. Although criminal and departmental proceedings are distinct, the material was identical in both proceedings, the appellant's explanation for possession of the foreign currency remained consistent, and the department failed to prove the alleged third person's role or any abetment. In the absence of corroborative evidence, the evidentiary basis for penalty was not established, and the penalty was set aside. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 13 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328998