https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464242 Fairness required cross-examination of the two identified witnesses whose statements were relied upon, because the request was limited to material witnesses and engaged natural justice. Penalty could not be sustained simultaneously under both Section 112(a) and Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962, as the two sub-clauses operate on mutually exclusive bases for the same conduct. The penalty order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after allowing cross-examination of the identified witnesses. en-us Mon, 04 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Oct 2025 20:30:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464242 Fairness required cross-examination of the two identified witnesses whose statements were relied upon, because the request was limited to material witnesses and engaged natural justice. Penalty could not be sustained simultaneously under both Section 112(a) and Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962, as the two sub-clauses operate on mutually exclusive bases for the same conduct. The penalty order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after allowing cross-examination of the identified witnesses. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 04 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464242