https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791913 Penalty under section 112(b) of the Customs Act was unsustainable because the record did not prove that the person was concerned with, possessed, or dealt in goods liable to confiscation, or that the person knew or believed they were so liable. Statements recorded under section 108 were not proved in the manner required by section 138B, and third-party ledger entries and computer print-outs lacked independent corroboration. On that evidence, the legal ingredients for penalty were not established. en-us Tue, 19 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 May 2026 08:31:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791913 Penalty under section 112(b) of the Customs Act was unsustainable because the record did not prove that the person was concerned with, possessed, or dealt in goods liable to confiscation, or that the person knew or believed they were so liable. Statements recorded under section 108 were not proved in the manner required by section 138B, and third-party ledger entries and computer print-outs lacked independent corroboration. On that evidence, the legal ingredients for penalty were not established. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 19 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791913