https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45511 The Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the penalty under Section 116 of the Customs Act. It held that the owner of the conveyance is deemed an agent of the person-in-charge under Section 148, emphasizing the necessity of implied agency for effective operations. The Court considered operational challenges if the commander or pilot had to personally handle Section 116 proceedings, concluding that airlines, as conveyance owners, bear responsibility. The Court affirmed this interpretation, highlighting potential delays and operational difficulties if penalties were solely imposed on the person-in-charge. en-us Wed, 29 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jul 2010 11:50:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45511 The Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the penalty under Section 116 of the Customs Act. It held that the owner of the conveyance is deemed an agent of the person-in-charge under Section 148, emphasizing the necessity of implied agency for effective operations. The Court considered operational challenges if the commander or pilot had to personally handle Section 116 proceedings, concluding that airlines, as conveyance owners, bear responsibility. The Court affirmed this interpretation, highlighting potential delays and operational difficulties if penalties were solely imposed on the person-in-charge. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 29 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45511