https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51464 Concealment for confiscation under Sections 118 and 119 of the Customs Act, 1962 requires conscious, not accidental, concealment, and the statutory basis must be proved on the notice and evidence. On the facts noted, the remaining scrap was not shown to have been used to conceal explosives, so confiscation of that scrap was not justified. Penalty under Section 112 also could not stand against the importers, their employees, the intermediary supplier, or the custom house agent and its employees because the notices did not properly allege the necessary breach, knowledge, or reason to believe, and mere negligence was insufficient. The confiscation of the explosive material itself remained undisturbed. en-us Thu, 12 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Sep 2010 18:44:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51464 Concealment for confiscation under Sections 118 and 119 of the Customs Act, 1962 requires conscious, not accidental, concealment, and the statutory basis must be proved on the notice and evidence. On the facts noted, the remaining scrap was not shown to have been used to conceal explosives, so confiscation of that scrap was not justified. Penalty under Section 112 also could not stand against the importers, their employees, the intermediary supplier, or the custom house agent and its employees because the notices did not properly allege the necessary breach, knowledge, or reason to believe, and mere negligence was insufficient. The confiscation of the explosive material itself remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 12 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51464