https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405783 An appellate authority cannot impose a penalty on a person when the adjudicating authority had not levied any penalty on that person and the Revenue filed no appeal against that part of the order; the penalty on Smt. Usha Devi was therefore set aside. Proceedings against Vijender Singh were held barred by limitation under Section 155(2) of the Customs Act because notice was issued after the prescribed period, so that objection was accepted. Absolute confiscation of the gold and the car, and the penalty on Vijender Singh, were also found unsustainable because the evidence, including statements and supporting records, did not conclusively prove smuggling and the source and ownership of the gold remained plausible, entitling him to benefit of doubt. en-us Thu, 25 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Mar 2021 07:40:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405783 An appellate authority cannot impose a penalty on a person when the adjudicating authority had not levied any penalty on that person and the Revenue filed no appeal against that part of the order; the penalty on Smt. Usha Devi was therefore set aside. Proceedings against Vijender Singh were held barred by limitation under Section 155(2) of the Customs Act because notice was issued after the prescribed period, so that objection was accepted. Absolute confiscation of the gold and the car, and the penalty on Vijender Singh, were also found unsustainable because the evidence, including statements and supporting records, did not conclusively prove smuggling and the source and ownership of the gold remained plausible, entitling him to benefit of doubt. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 25 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405783