https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784591 Penalty for misdeclaration leading to confiscation under s.111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 was challenged on the ground that the appellant, being a predecessor-in-title to a transferable DFRC licence, had no involvement in the impugned import. The HC held that penalty is unsustainable where the person penalised had admittedly no role in the import or the alleged misdeclaration, and mere linkage through prior ownership of a subsequently transferred licence does not establish culpability. Consequently, the question of law was answered in favour of the appellant and against the Revenue, and the penalty could not be sustained. en-us Fri, 02 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Jan 2026 08:19:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784591 Penalty for misdeclaration leading to confiscation under s.111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962 was challenged on the ground that the appellant, being a predecessor-in-title to a transferable DFRC licence, had no involvement in the impugned import. The HC held that penalty is unsustainable where the person penalised had admittedly no role in the import or the alleged misdeclaration, and mere linkage through prior ownership of a subsequently transferred licence does not establish culpability. Consequently, the question of law was answered in favour of the appellant and against the Revenue, and the penalty could not be sustained. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 02 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784591