https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791979 Penalty under section 112(b) of the Customs Act could not be sustained where the department relied mainly on third-party records and a statement under section 108 without compliance with section 138B. The appellants had denied purchasing the alleged non-duty-paid goods and produced purchase ledgers, bank records and clearance documents showing recorded sales of fabricated material to the supplier. As the statement was not tested in the manner required by law, it could not serve as substantive evidence, and the record lacked independent corroboration of knowledge or involvement in goods liable to confiscation. The penalty order was therefore set aside. en-us Tue, 19 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 May 2026 08:30:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791979 Penalty under section 112(b) of the Customs Act could not be sustained where the department relied mainly on third-party records and a statement under section 108 without compliance with section 138B. The appellants had denied purchasing the alleged non-duty-paid goods and produced purchase ledgers, bank records and clearance documents showing recorded sales of fabricated material to the supplier. As the statement was not tested in the manner required by law, it could not serve as substantive evidence, and the record lacked independent corroboration of knowledge or involvement in goods liable to confiscation. The penalty order was therefore set aside. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 19 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791979