https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776682 The CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal and set aside the penalty of Rs. 1,00,000 each imposed on the appellants under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The tribunal found no evidence implicating the Customs Brokers in the mis-declaration or misuse of the IEC, as neither the IEC holder nor the beneficial owner attributed any wrongdoing to them. The Commissioner's presumption of the appellants' knowledge of the conspiracy was deemed speculative and unsupported by investigation. The Customs Brokers had merely submitted documents provided by the importer and were not responsible for verifying the authenticity of the declarations. The appeal was allowed on the basis that the appellants had fulfilled their obligations and the penalty was unjustified. en-us Thu, 07 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Aug 2025 10:11:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776682 The CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal and set aside the penalty of Rs. 1,00,000 each imposed on the appellants under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The tribunal found no evidence implicating the Customs Brokers in the mis-declaration or misuse of the IEC, as neither the IEC holder nor the beneficial owner attributed any wrongdoing to them. The Commissioner's presumption of the appellants' knowledge of the conspiracy was deemed speculative and unsupported by investigation. The Customs Brokers had merely submitted documents provided by the importer and were not responsible for verifying the authenticity of the declarations. The appeal was allowed on the basis that the appellants had fulfilled their obligations and the penalty was unjustified. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 07 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776682