https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785853 Alleged breaches of cargo handling regulations were not established where the fire incident was contained, no admissible material showed deliberate default or failure to meet safety and security obligations, and the adverse finding rested on speculation. The finding was also vitiated because the Commissioner differed from the enquiry authority without giving prior notice of disagreement, contrary to natural justice. In these circumstances, the residuary penalty under section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962 could not be invoked, particularly where the regulatory scheme itself provided specific penalties for the alleged contraventions. The impugned order was therefore unsustainable. en-us Thu, 22 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Feb 2026 08:20:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785853 Alleged breaches of cargo handling regulations were not established where the fire incident was contained, no admissible material showed deliberate default or failure to meet safety and security obligations, and the adverse finding rested on speculation. The finding was also vitiated because the Commissioner differed from the enquiry authority without giving prior notice of disagreement, contrary to natural justice. In these circumstances, the residuary penalty under section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962 could not be invoked, particularly where the regulatory scheme itself provided specific penalties for the alleged contraventions. The impugned order was therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 22 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785853