https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336250 The tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant for aiding and abetting in unauthorized import and clearance of gold jewellery concealed in imported packages. The appellant's role as a courier service provider did not align with the regulations placing responsibility solely on the courier for clearance and delivery. The tribunal found no legal basis for penalty imposition under section 112 of the Customs Act 1962, ultimately allowing the appeal and relieving the appellant of the penalty. en-us Mon, 01 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 Jan 2018 17:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336250 The tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant for aiding and abetting in unauthorized import and clearance of gold jewellery concealed in imported packages. The appellant's role as a courier service provider did not align with the regulations placing responsibility solely on the courier for clearance and delivery. The tribunal found no legal basis for penalty imposition under section 112 of the Customs Act 1962, ultimately allowing the appeal and relieving the appellant of the penalty. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 01 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336250