https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47144 Penalty under Section 167(8) of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 requires proof that the person proceeded against was concerned in the illegal importation itself. The offence of importation is completed when the goods cross the customs frontier, and a prior nexus with that act must be shown. Mere possession of smuggled gold, even with knowledge of its character, does not by itself establish participation in importation. On the facts noted, the order recorded only recovery of smuggled gold and did not link the appellant to the importation or address whether he was concerned in that offence, so the penalty was not sustainable on possession alone. en-us Mon, 23 Nov 1964 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Sep 2016 15:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47144 Penalty under Section 167(8) of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 requires proof that the person proceeded against was concerned in the illegal importation itself. The offence of importation is completed when the goods cross the customs frontier, and a prior nexus with that act must be shown. Mere possession of smuggled gold, even with knowledge of its character, does not by itself establish participation in importation. On the facts noted, the order recorded only recovery of smuggled gold and did not link the appellant to the importation or address whether he was concerned in that offence, so the penalty was not sustainable on possession alone. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 23 Nov 1964 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47144