https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353245 The Judicial Member allowed all three appeals and dropped the penalties imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant's involvement in abetting undervaluation was not conclusively proven, and the appellant's role as a Clearing and Forwarding Agent did not demonstrate aiding in customs duty evasion. The judgment referenced Section 28(6) of the Customs Act, deeming proceedings conclusive upon full payment of duty, interest, and penalty. Consequently, the penalties were dropped in all appeals, providing relief to the appellant based on statutory provisions and lack of concrete evidence implicating the appellant in alleged customs duty evasion. en-us Mon, 27 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Mar 2019 16:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353245 The Judicial Member allowed all three appeals and dropped the penalties imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant's involvement in abetting undervaluation was not conclusively proven, and the appellant's role as a Clearing and Forwarding Agent did not demonstrate aiding in customs duty evasion. The judgment referenced Section 28(6) of the Customs Act, deeming proceedings conclusive upon full payment of duty, interest, and penalty. Consequently, the penalties were dropped in all appeals, providing relief to the appellant based on statutory provisions and lack of concrete evidence implicating the appellant in alleged customs duty evasion. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 27 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353245