https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784418 Penalty under s.112(b) Customs Act, 1962 was challenged on the ground that it rested solely on a co-accused's statement recorded under s.108 alleging that the appellant handed over gold biscuits for delivery. The Tribunal held that a co-accused's confession is not substantive evidence and can be relied upon only as corroborative assurance to other independent incriminating material; it requires close scrutiny and must be supported by independent corroboration. As the investigation neither traced the alleged recipient nor produced any corroborative evidence to substantiate the co-accused's version, the statement could not, by itself, sustain penal liability. The penalty was set aside and the appeal was allowed. en-us Tue, 09 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Jan 2026 08:04:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784418 Penalty under s.112(b) Customs Act, 1962 was challenged on the ground that it rested solely on a co-accused's statement recorded under s.108 alleging that the appellant handed over gold biscuits for delivery. The Tribunal held that a co-accused's confession is not substantive evidence and can be relied upon only as corroborative assurance to other independent incriminating material; it requires close scrutiny and must be supported by independent corroboration. As the investigation neither traced the alleged recipient nor produced any corroborative evidence to substantiate the co-accused's version, the statement could not, by itself, sustain penal liability. The penalty was set aside and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 09 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784418