https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786886 Issuance of accountant certificates without proof of collusion, knowledge of fraud, or active participation does not constitute abetment attracting penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act; such conduct at most establishes professional negligence. Applying the Mahesh P. Patel principle, where certificates were produced at a third party's instance, licences predated the certificates, no direct or indirect benefit or collusion is proved, and similar proceedings against the third party were dropped, the requisite nexus for confiscation and penal liability under Sections 111 and 112(a) is absent. Consequent operative effect: penalties were set aside and appeals allowed in favour of the appellant. en-us Thu, 19 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Feb 2026 09:29:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786886 Issuance of accountant certificates without proof of collusion, knowledge of fraud, or active participation does not constitute abetment attracting penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act; such conduct at most establishes professional negligence. Applying the Mahesh P. Patel principle, where certificates were produced at a third party's instance, licences predated the certificates, no direct or indirect benefit or collusion is proved, and similar proceedings against the third party were dropped, the requisite nexus for confiscation and penal liability under Sections 111 and 112(a) is absent. Consequent operative effect: penalties were set aside and appeals allowed in favour of the appellant. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 19 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786886