https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767972 CESTAT Kolkata-AT set aside penalties imposed under Section 112(a) of Customs Act, 1962 for alleged undervaluation of imported goods. The tribunal found no evidence establishing appellant as kingpin in undervaluation racket. Despite appellant's role as financer who voluntarily paid differential duty of Rs.30 lakh, tribunal held this insufficient to prove knowledge or intentional involvement in malpractice. Department's failure to provide cross-examination of co-accused and crucial import documents violated natural justice principles. Co-accused statements lacked evidentiary value without cross-examination opportunity. Appeal allowed, impugned order set aside. en-us Wed, 26 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Mar 2025 08:31:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767972 CESTAT Kolkata-AT set aside penalties imposed under Section 112(a) of Customs Act, 1962 for alleged undervaluation of imported goods. The tribunal found no evidence establishing appellant as kingpin in undervaluation racket. Despite appellant's role as financer who voluntarily paid differential duty of Rs.30 lakh, tribunal held this insufficient to prove knowledge or intentional involvement in malpractice. Department's failure to provide cross-examination of co-accused and crucial import documents violated natural justice principles. Co-accused statements lacked evidentiary value without cross-examination opportunity. Appeal allowed, impugned order set aside. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 26 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767972