https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775919 The HC held that there was no violation of natural justice as the petitioner was given multiple opportunities for personal hearing and the request for cross-examination was properly refused due to lack of justification. However, the adjudicating authority failed to establish that the petitioner had knowledge of the misdeclaration of goods, a necessary element under Section 112(a) of the Act. The mere allegation of abetment without clear findings of the petitioner's involvement was insufficient. Consequently, the HC found the direction holding the petitioner liable under Section 112(a) to be perverse and unsustainable, and interfered with that part of the order, disposing of the petition accordingly. en-us Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Aug 2025 07:24:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775919 The HC held that there was no violation of natural justice as the petitioner was given multiple opportunities for personal hearing and the request for cross-examination was properly refused due to lack of justification. However, the adjudicating authority failed to establish that the petitioner had knowledge of the misdeclaration of goods, a necessary element under Section 112(a) of the Act. The mere allegation of abetment without clear findings of the petitioner's involvement was insufficient. Consequently, the HC found the direction holding the petitioner liable under Section 112(a) to be perverse and unsustainable, and interfered with that part of the order, disposing of the petition accordingly. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775919