https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764895 CESTAT Kolkata set aside penalty imposed under Section 112(a) and 112(b) of Customs Act, 1962 against appellant in gold smuggling case. Tribunal found insufficient evidence to establish appellant's involvement beyond retracted confessional statement of co-accused from whom one kg gold was recovered. Telephonic communication between appellant and co-accused, being known persons working together in committee, could not establish smuggling connection. Authority failed to prove appellant dealt with seized goods with prior knowledge of their liability for confiscation. Appeal allowed. en-us Wed, 18 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Jan 2025 20:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764895 CESTAT Kolkata set aside penalty imposed under Section 112(a) and 112(b) of Customs Act, 1962 against appellant in gold smuggling case. Tribunal found insufficient evidence to establish appellant's involvement beyond retracted confessional statement of co-accused from whom one kg gold was recovered. Telephonic communication between appellant and co-accused, being known persons working together in committee, could not establish smuggling connection. Authority failed to prove appellant dealt with seized goods with prior knowledge of their liability for confiscation. Appeal allowed. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 18 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764895