https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783480 The Tribunal held that allegations of collusion, wilful misstatement and suppression under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 were unsustainable, as the appellant's failure to fulfil export obligations arose from absence of export orders, and the imported materials were used domestically with duty and interest paid voluntarily prior to issuance of notice. By operation of Section 28(10B) and 28(2), the show cause notice dated 23.01.2018 was deemed to be under Section 28(1), and in such circumstances issuance of notice itself was unwarranted. Consequently, penalty under Section 114A was held unjustified. The impugned order was set aside to the extent of equal penalty under Section 114A, and the appeal was allowed. en-us Mon, 15 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Dec 2025 18:57:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783480 The Tribunal held that allegations of collusion, wilful misstatement and suppression under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 were unsustainable, as the appellant's failure to fulfil export obligations arose from absence of export orders, and the imported materials were used domestically with duty and interest paid voluntarily prior to issuance of notice. By operation of Section 28(10B) and 28(2), the show cause notice dated 23.01.2018 was deemed to be under Section 28(1), and in such circumstances issuance of notice itself was unwarranted. Consequently, penalty under Section 114A was held unjustified. The impugned order was set aside to the extent of equal penalty under Section 114A, and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 15 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783480