https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443452 Penalty under Section 112A of the Customs Act, 1962 could not be sustained against a container freight station where the record did not establish knowledge of the fraudulent clearance or conscious involvement in the use of forged documents. The clearances were made on fabricated bills of entry and forged customs endorsements, but no statement or other material showed that the appellant or its management had mens rea or awareness of the fraud. Mere omission by staff, without proof of deliberate participation or knowledge, was insufficient to fasten penalty. The penalty was therefore set aside in favour of the appellant. en-us Thu, 21 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Sep 2023 10:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443452 Penalty under Section 112A of the Customs Act, 1962 could not be sustained against a container freight station where the record did not establish knowledge of the fraudulent clearance or conscious involvement in the use of forged documents. The clearances were made on fabricated bills of entry and forged customs endorsements, but no statement or other material showed that the appellant or its management had mens rea or awareness of the fraud. Mere omission by staff, without proof of deliberate participation or knowledge, was insufficient to fasten penalty. The penalty was therefore set aside in favour of the appellant. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 21 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443452