https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96325 The dispute concerned imposition of a penalty and suspension of a customs broker licence for allegedly aiding and abetting an exporter who misdeclared prohibited Bos Indicus meat as boneless buffalo meat. The High Court found that penal liability under the Customs regime requires proof of both mens rea and actus reus, and there was no evidence of intentional wrongdoing, collusion, or active involvement by the broker; accordingly the penalty and licence suspension as to the petitioner were quashed. The Court also held the writ petitions maintainable due to non-application of mind in the administrative orders, which lacked substantive justification. en-us Sat, 24 Jan 2026 13:26:57 +0530 Sat, 24 Jan 2026 13:26:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96325 The dispute concerned imposition of a penalty and suspension of a customs broker licence for allegedly aiding and abetting an exporter who misdeclared prohibited Bos Indicus meat as boneless buffalo meat. The High Court found that penal liability under the Customs regime requires proof of both mens rea and actus reus, and there was no evidence of intentional wrongdoing, collusion, or active involvement by the broker; accordingly the penalty and licence suspension as to the petitioner were quashed. The Court also held the writ petitions maintainable due to non-application of mind in the administrative orders, which lacked substantive justification. Highlights Customs Sat, 24 Jan 2026 13:26:57 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96325