https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368801 Penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act was sustained because the appellant's unretracted statement under Section 108 admitted agreement to pay consideration for customs clearance and misdeclaration of the vehicle value, establishing conduct attracting penal consequences. Penalty under Section 114AA was set aside because the statutory ingredients were not proved: the appellant had not made, signed, or used any false or incorrect declaration, statement, or document in relation to importation. The appeal succeeded only to the limited extent of deletion of the Section 114AA penalty, while the Section 112(a) penalty remained in force. en-us Mon, 23 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Oct 2018 14:11:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368801 Penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act was sustained because the appellant's unretracted statement under Section 108 admitted agreement to pay consideration for customs clearance and misdeclaration of the vehicle value, establishing conduct attracting penal consequences. Penalty under Section 114AA was set aside because the statutory ingredients were not proved: the appellant had not made, signed, or used any false or incorrect declaration, statement, or document in relation to importation. The appeal succeeded only to the limited extent of deletion of the Section 114AA penalty, while the Section 112(a) penalty remained in force. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 23 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368801