https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187905 Item 8 of section 167 of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 was construed as creating two independent alternative penalties, one capped at three times the value of the goods and the other capped at Rs. 1,000, so the provision could authorise a penalty above Rs. 1,000 where the first alternative applied. Earlier Supreme Court references to a Rs. 1,000 maximum were treated as incidental and not as binding determinations of that question. The construction was supported by the anti-smuggling object of the Act and by the structure of other items in the same section. The provision was therefore understood to permit higher pecuniary penalties within the stated limit. en-us Fri, 03 Feb 1961 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Nov 2016 16:47:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187905 Item 8 of section 167 of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 was construed as creating two independent alternative penalties, one capped at three times the value of the goods and the other capped at Rs. 1,000, so the provision could authorise a penalty above Rs. 1,000 where the first alternative applied. Earlier Supreme Court references to a Rs. 1,000 maximum were treated as incidental and not as binding determinations of that question. The construction was supported by the anti-smuggling object of the Act and by the structure of other items in the same section. The provision was therefore understood to permit higher pecuniary penalties within the stated limit. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 03 Feb 1961 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187905