https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759259 Delhi HC dismissed appeal by customs cargo service provider challenging duty and penalty imposition under Section 45 of Customs Act, 1962 for pilfered goods. Court held that as custodian of imported goods in customs area, appellant bore responsibility for safe custody and could not shift liability to CISF security. Section 45(3) makes custodian liable for duty on goods pilfered while in custody. Appellant's contention of non-participation in Panchnama and CISF's security responsibility rejected. Appeal dismissed as lacking substantial legal question. en-us Mon, 09 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Sep 2024 08:18:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759259 Delhi HC dismissed appeal by customs cargo service provider challenging duty and penalty imposition under Section 45 of Customs Act, 1962 for pilfered goods. Court held that as custodian of imported goods in customs area, appellant bore responsibility for safe custody and could not shift liability to CISF security. Section 45(3) makes custodian liable for duty on goods pilfered while in custody. Appellant's contention of non-participation in Panchnama and CISF's security responsibility rejected. Appeal dismissed as lacking substantial legal question. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 09 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759259