https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357551 The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962, due to lack of evidence establishing his role as an abettor in the improper export of restricted items. The Tribunal found it unjust to penalize only the appellant, an employee of a CHA firm, without investigating the CHA's involvement. The appellant's appeal was allowed, and the penalty was overturned, as the allegations of lack of due diligence and violation of CHALR, 2004 were deemed incorrectly attributed to him. en-us Mon, 12 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Mar 2019 13:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357551 The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962, due to lack of evidence establishing his role as an abettor in the improper export of restricted items. The Tribunal found it unjust to penalize only the appellant, an employee of a CHA firm, without investigating the CHA's involvement. The appellant's appeal was allowed, and the penalty was overturned, as the allegations of lack of due diligence and violation of CHALR, 2004 were deemed incorrectly attributed to him. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 12 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357551