https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395336 The judgment upheld the authority of the Additional Commissioner of Customs to pass orders regarding penalties and confiscation under Section 122 of the Customs Act. It emphasized the admissibility of statements recorded under the Act, particularly Section 108, for imposing penalties, noting the appellant's admission of involvement in smuggling activity. The imposition of penalties under Section 112(a) was upheld based on the appellant's statement and lack of retraction. The competency of the Additional Commissioner was affirmed, and the lack of retraction and consistency of statements led to the dismissal of the appeal, with costs denied and the stay application dismissed. en-us Wed, 11 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Dec 2020 11:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395336 The judgment upheld the authority of the Additional Commissioner of Customs to pass orders regarding penalties and confiscation under Section 122 of the Customs Act. It emphasized the admissibility of statements recorded under the Act, particularly Section 108, for imposing penalties, noting the appellant's admission of involvement in smuggling activity. The imposition of penalties under Section 112(a) was upheld based on the appellant's statement and lack of retraction. The competency of the Additional Commissioner was affirmed, and the lack of retraction and consistency of statements led to the dismissal of the appeal, with costs denied and the stay application dismissed. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 11 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395336