https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45769 Section 167(8) of the Sea Customs Act was construed strictly as a penal provision, so liability arose only where a person was concerned in the prohibited importation itself. Importation was treated as complete once the goods crossed the customs barrier; later acts such as dealing with, melting, or concealing the gold after entry into India did not constitute participation in the importation offence. On the admitted facts, the petitioners' conduct related only to post-importation handling, and they were therefore not persons concerned in the offence of importation. The penalty imposed under section 167(8) was held without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed. en-us Fri, 06 Nov 1959 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Jul 2010 16:48:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45769 Section 167(8) of the Sea Customs Act was construed strictly as a penal provision, so liability arose only where a person was concerned in the prohibited importation itself. Importation was treated as complete once the goods crossed the customs barrier; later acts such as dealing with, melting, or concealing the gold after entry into India did not constitute participation in the importation offence. On the admitted facts, the petitioners' conduct related only to post-importation handling, and they were therefore not persons concerned in the offence of importation. The penalty imposed under section 167(8) was held without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 06 Nov 1959 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45769