https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361520 Settlement in favour of the main noticee did not automatically extend immunity to co-noticees where the Settlement Commission expressly reserved liberty to the Revenue to proceed against them. As the co-noticees were found to have engaged in distinct conduct, including unauthorized transportation of the goods, their liability had to be assessed separately and was not confined to mere abetment. The penalty on the co-noticees was therefore upheld. en-us Tue, 05 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Jun 2018 08:22:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361520 Settlement in favour of the main noticee did not automatically extend immunity to co-noticees where the Settlement Commission expressly reserved liberty to the Revenue to proceed against them. As the co-noticees were found to have engaged in distinct conduct, including unauthorized transportation of the goods, their liability had to be assessed separately and was not confined to mere abetment. The penalty on the co-noticees was therefore upheld. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 05 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361520