https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787694 Penalty under the Customs Act was considered against two appellants accused of possessing foreign-marked gold; the controlling legal test was whether the person "knows or has reason to believe" the goods were liable to confiscation. The Tribunal found inconsistencies in appellant accounts, absence of corroborative proof about the alleged intermediary, and conduct permitting an inference of prior knowledge, satisfying the Section 112(b) standard; it therefore affirmed imposition of penalties but moderated them on proportionality grounds in view of incarceration and ongoing prosecution. en-us Tue, 10 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Mar 2026 08:17:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787694 Penalty under the Customs Act was considered against two appellants accused of possessing foreign-marked gold; the controlling legal test was whether the person "knows or has reason to believe" the goods were liable to confiscation. The Tribunal found inconsistencies in appellant accounts, absence of corroborative proof about the alleged intermediary, and conduct permitting an inference of prior knowledge, satisfying the Section 112(b) standard; it therefore affirmed imposition of penalties but moderated them on proportionality grounds in view of incarceration and ongoing prosecution. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 10 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787694