https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47400 Liability to personal penalty arose where an importer signed declarations as proprietor, opened a bank account in the concern's name, and signed blank forms and letterheads used to clear goods through a non-existent entity. Those acts were treated as deliberate facilitation of customs clearance, not innocent assistance, and the absence of direct handling of the bank account or later steps did not negate his material role in the misdeclaration. Personal knowledge of every subsequent act was unnecessary because his own conduct aided the attempted evasion. Penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 was upheld, with no interference or reduction. en-us Thu, 17 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Jul 2010 15:43:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47400 Liability to personal penalty arose where an importer signed declarations as proprietor, opened a bank account in the concern's name, and signed blank forms and letterheads used to clear goods through a non-existent entity. Those acts were treated as deliberate facilitation of customs clearance, not innocent assistance, and the absence of direct handling of the bank account or later steps did not negate his material role in the misdeclaration. Personal knowledge of every subsequent act was unnecessary because his own conduct aided the attempted evasion. Penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 was upheld, with no interference or reduction. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 17 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47400