https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345360 A binding undertaking given before the High Court to pay any adjudicated customs duty from the sale proceeds of auctioned machinery justified recovery of the confirmed duty from the appellant, even though the High Court had not determined the loanee's liability itself. Penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 was unsustainable because the appellant had not imported the goods and the machinery was not liable to confiscation under Section 111. CESTAT therefore upheld duty recovery but set aside the penalty, granting only partial relief. en-us Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Jul 2017 07:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345360 A binding undertaking given before the High Court to pay any adjudicated customs duty from the sale proceeds of auctioned machinery justified recovery of the confirmed duty from the appellant, even though the High Court had not determined the loanee's liability itself. Penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 was unsustainable because the appellant had not imported the goods and the machinery was not liable to confiscation under Section 111. CESTAT therefore upheld duty recovery but set aside the penalty, granting only partial relief. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345360