https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437646 Penalties for abetment in export misdeclaration require admissible, cogent evidence of conscious participation or intentional aid. Contradictory investigation statements recorded without cross-examination cannot, by themselves, establish a customs house agent, its G-card holder, or employee's knowledge, connivance, or abetment in overvaluation or misdescription of goods. In the absence of an agreement proving alleged control or partnership and independent evidence linking them to the exporter's conduct, document-processing intermediaries cannot be held liable for misdeclaration. The penalties were therefore unsustainable and the appeals succeeded. en-us Tue, 09 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 May 2023 19:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437646 Penalties for abetment in export misdeclaration require admissible, cogent evidence of conscious participation or intentional aid. Contradictory investigation statements recorded without cross-examination cannot, by themselves, establish a customs house agent, its G-card holder, or employee's knowledge, connivance, or abetment in overvaluation or misdescription of goods. In the absence of an agreement proving alleged control or partnership and independent evidence linking them to the exporter's conduct, document-processing intermediaries cannot be held liable for misdeclaration. The penalties were therefore unsustainable and the appeals succeeded. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 09 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437646