https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784415 Invocation of s.28(4) Customs Act and consequent mandatory penalty under s.114A was in issue where duty and interest were paid shortly after clearance, but the department alleged wilful misstatement/suppression to deny "deemed conclusion" and sustain confiscation/penalties. The Tribunal held that mere lapse of a few days between "out of charge" and payment, absent corroborative evidence, does not establish collusion, wilful misstatement, or suppression, particularly when delayed payment attracted interest, no undue gain was shown, and system changes in ICES contributed to delayed capture of duty. Resort to s.28(4) was unjustified and disproportionate; penalties and confiscation were set aside and the appeal was allowed. en-us Mon, 08 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Jan 2026 08:04:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784415 Invocation of s.28(4) Customs Act and consequent mandatory penalty under s.114A was in issue where duty and interest were paid shortly after clearance, but the department alleged wilful misstatement/suppression to deny "deemed conclusion" and sustain confiscation/penalties. The Tribunal held that mere lapse of a few days between "out of charge" and payment, absent corroborative evidence, does not establish collusion, wilful misstatement, or suppression, particularly when delayed payment attracted interest, no undue gain was shown, and system changes in ICES contributed to delayed capture of duty. Resort to s.28(4) was unjustified and disproportionate; penalties and confiscation were set aside and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 08 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784415