https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429637 The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 112(b)(i) of the Customs Act, as mens rea was not established. Additionally, the confiscation of gold and Indian currency under various sections of the Customs Act was deemed unjustified due to lack of evidence proving smuggling. The Tribunal found inconsistencies in the recorded statements and concluded that the appellant, acting as a broker, did not knowingly deal with smuggled gold. The appeal was allowed, and consequential benefits were granted to the appellant. en-us Mon, 31 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Nov 2022 09:12:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429637 The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 112(b)(i) of the Customs Act, as mens rea was not established. Additionally, the confiscation of gold and Indian currency under various sections of the Customs Act was deemed unjustified due to lack of evidence proving smuggling. The Tribunal found inconsistencies in the recorded statements and concluded that the appellant, acting as a broker, did not knowingly deal with smuggled gold. The appeal was allowed, and consequential benefits were granted to the appellant. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 31 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429637