https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354095 Penalty under customs law cannot be sustained where the show cause notice and adjudication rest on inconsistent theories and the record does not prove active participation in the import violation. The notice alleged that the appellant was the real importer through a dummy front, but the adjudication rejected that basis and shifted to abetment without supporting evidence. Normal banking payments, routing through an intermediary, and the absence of reliable material on undervaluation or direct involvement were treated as insufficient to establish liability. The valuation issue had also been remanded in connected proceedings. The penalty was therefore held unsustainable and set aside. en-us Fri, 05 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Mar 2019 14:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354095 Penalty under customs law cannot be sustained where the show cause notice and adjudication rest on inconsistent theories and the record does not prove active participation in the import violation. The notice alleged that the appellant was the real importer through a dummy front, but the adjudication rejected that basis and shifted to abetment without supporting evidence. Normal banking payments, routing through an intermediary, and the absence of reliable material on undervaluation or direct involvement were treated as insufficient to establish liability. The valuation issue had also been remanded in connected proceedings. The penalty was therefore held unsustainable and set aside. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 05 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354095