https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51607 Penalty under Section 112(a)(ii) of the Customs Act could not stand because the notice did not propose confiscation of any goods under Section 111, and the record did not establish a confiscability foundation. The penalty was therefore set aside. Interest on duty confirmed for misuse of advance licence imports was also unsustainable, because recovery had to rest on an operative statutory power under the Customs Act and the provision relied on was not shown to authorise the demand on these facts. The interest demand was set aside. The duty liability itself remained undisturbed. en-us Fri, 20 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Sep 2010 11:13:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51607 Penalty under Section 112(a)(ii) of the Customs Act could not stand because the notice did not propose confiscation of any goods under Section 111, and the record did not establish a confiscability foundation. The penalty was therefore set aside. Interest on duty confirmed for misuse of advance licence imports was also unsustainable, because recovery had to rest on an operative statutory power under the Customs Act and the provision relied on was not shown to authorise the demand on these facts. The interest demand was set aside. The duty liability itself remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 20 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51607