https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389136 The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant under the Customs Act, 1962, due to insufficient evidence linking them to the alleged mis-declaration. The lack of concrete proof of involvement in previous mis-declarations led to the decision that suspicion alone cannot establish guilt. As the appellant had not claimed the imported goods, the Tribunal did not address the confiscation order. Ultimately, the appeal was partly allowed, providing relief to the appellant by overturning the penalty. en-us Thu, 28 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Nov 2020 16:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389136 The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant under the Customs Act, 1962, due to insufficient evidence linking them to the alleged mis-declaration. The lack of concrete proof of involvement in previous mis-declarations led to the decision that suspicion alone cannot establish guilt. As the appellant had not claimed the imported goods, the Tribunal did not address the confiscation order. Ultimately, the appeal was partly allowed, providing relief to the appellant by overturning the penalty. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 28 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389136