https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792805 Penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act could not be sustained where the investigation failed to identify the actual importer and relied instead on an uncorroborated, retracted statement without effective cross-examination or independent supporting material. Abetment liability requires proof of a principal act rendering the goods liable to confiscation and a legally reliable foundation showing facilitation of that act, which was absent on the facts recorded. Section 114AA was also held inapplicable because it was treated as confined to fraudulent export transactions and not import cases. The penalties were set aside. en-us Tue, 02 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Jun 2026 08:37:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792805 Penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act could not be sustained where the investigation failed to identify the actual importer and relied instead on an uncorroborated, retracted statement without effective cross-examination or independent supporting material. Abetment liability requires proof of a principal act rendering the goods liable to confiscation and a legally reliable foundation showing facilitation of that act, which was absent on the facts recorded. Section 114AA was also held inapplicable because it was treated as confined to fraudulent export transactions and not import cases. The penalties were set aside. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 02 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792805