https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464179 CESTAT NEW DELHI held that penalties under s.114(i) and (iii) of the Customs Act imposed on the courier appellants were not sustainable and allowed the appeal. The tribunal found appellants acted on "said to contain" declarations, had carriage conditions requiring shippers to declare prohibited items, and could not open packages without customs permission (Reg.6(2)(b)). No evidence showed appellants' prior knowledge or active involvement in illegal export of antiques, and analogous tribunal precedents supported that courier liability for consignor declarations is limited, so the penalties were set aside. en-us Mon, 25 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Oct 2025 20:48:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464179 CESTAT NEW DELHI held that penalties under s.114(i) and (iii) of the Customs Act imposed on the courier appellants were not sustainable and allowed the appeal. The tribunal found appellants acted on "said to contain" declarations, had carriage conditions requiring shippers to declare prohibited items, and could not open packages without customs permission (Reg.6(2)(b)). No evidence showed appellants' prior knowledge or active involvement in illegal export of antiques, and analogous tribunal precedents supported that courier liability for consignor declarations is limited, so the penalties were set aside. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 25 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464179