https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772161 CESTAT NEW DELHI held that statements recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act cannot be considered as evidence under section 138B without following proper procedural requirements. The case involved diversion of goods from Focus Market Scheme countries to Dubai for undue benefits. The Tribunal ruled that statements under section 108 are inadmissible as evidence unless the adjudicating authority determines admissibility and provides cross-examination opportunity. Since penalties under sections 114(iii) and 114AA were based solely on section 108 statements without proper evidence, the penalties were unsustainable. Appeal allowed. en-us Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Jun 2025 08:25:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772161 CESTAT NEW DELHI held that statements recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act cannot be considered as evidence under section 138B without following proper procedural requirements. The case involved diversion of goods from Focus Market Scheme countries to Dubai for undue benefits. The Tribunal ruled that statements under section 108 are inadmissible as evidence unless the adjudicating authority determines admissibility and provides cross-examination opportunity. Since penalties under sections 114(iii) and 114AA were based solely on section 108 statements without proper evidence, the penalties were unsustainable. Appeal allowed. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772161