https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90017 CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside penalty imposed under Section 114(i) of Customs Act, 1962 against appellant for alleged smuggling of red sanders wood disguised as ragi. The tribunal held that penalty under Section 114(i) requires proof of mens rea as it constitutes penalty in personam, not in rem. Customs authorities failed to establish appellant's intentional involvement in loading red sanders, tampering with container, or knowledge of prohibited goods being loaded. The tribunal emphasized that abetment requires positive act with criminal intent, and burden of proof lies on Customs to demonstrate guilt through satisfactory evidence. Appellant's exculpatory statement remained uncontroverted, and preponderance of probability favored appellant's innocence regarding any deliberate act or omission facilitating the attempted export of prohibited red sanders logs. en-us Wed, 02 Jul 2025 08:42:28 +0530 Wed, 02 Jul 2025 08:42:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90017 CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside penalty imposed under Section 114(i) of Customs Act, 1962 against appellant for alleged smuggling of red sanders wood disguised as ragi. The tribunal held that penalty under Section 114(i) requires proof of mens rea as it constitutes penalty in personam, not in rem. Customs authorities failed to establish appellant's intentional involvement in loading red sanders, tampering with container, or knowledge of prohibited goods being loaded. The tribunal emphasized that abetment requires positive act with criminal intent, and burden of proof lies on Customs to demonstrate guilt through satisfactory evidence. Appellant's exculpatory statement remained uncontroverted, and preponderance of probability favored appellant's innocence regarding any deliberate act or omission facilitating the attempted export of prohibited red sanders logs. Highlights Customs Wed, 02 Jul 2025 08:42:28 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90017