https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50547 The Tribunal allowed the appeal by M/s. Maruti Udyog Limited, setting aside the penalty imposed for failure to meet export obligations and the unclear basis for penalty under Sections 111 and 112 of the Customs Act. The Tribunal clarified that penalties under Section 112 cannot substitute confiscation under Section 111, and found that the imported goods were not liable for confiscation or penalty due to timely payment of duty and lack of evidence of willful misconduct. The Tribunal emphasized that failure to fulfill export obligations does not automatically render goods liable for confiscation. en-us Thu, 22 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Aug 2010 13:06:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50547 The Tribunal allowed the appeal by M/s. Maruti Udyog Limited, setting aside the penalty imposed for failure to meet export obligations and the unclear basis for penalty under Sections 111 and 112 of the Customs Act. The Tribunal clarified that penalties under Section 112 cannot substitute confiscation under Section 111, and found that the imported goods were not liable for confiscation or penalty due to timely payment of duty and lack of evidence of willful misconduct. The Tribunal emphasized that failure to fulfill export obligations does not automatically render goods liable for confiscation. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 22 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50547