https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448064 The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant, a goldsmith, for alleged involvement in smuggling foreign-origin gold. It found no evidence linking the appellant to the smuggling activities or proving his awareness of the gold's origin. The appellant had merely taken gold bars for making ornaments without claiming ownership or knowledge of their smuggled status. The Tribunal ruled that the penalty under sections 112(a) and 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962, was unsustainable due to the lack of evidence, thus allowing the appeal. en-us Wed, 03 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Jan 2024 09:21:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448064 The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant, a goldsmith, for alleged involvement in smuggling foreign-origin gold. It found no evidence linking the appellant to the smuggling activities or proving his awareness of the gold's origin. The appellant had merely taken gold bars for making ornaments without claiming ownership or knowledge of their smuggled status. The Tribunal ruled that the penalty under sections 112(a) and 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962, was unsustainable due to the lack of evidence, thus allowing the appeal. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 03 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448064