https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53129 The appeal in the case involved the confiscation of goods under Sections 111(d) and (m) of the Customs Act, 1962, and the imposition of penalties under Section 112. The Tribunal found that the confiscation under Sections 111(d) and (m) was not justified as no valid reasons were provided, and the appellants were allowed to re-export the goods based on ownership rights. Consequently, penalties under Section 112 were invalidated. The majority opinion favored the appellants, setting aside the confiscation order and allowing re-export without penalties, while the dissenting opinion argued for confiscation and penalties due to misdeclaration. Ultimately, the appeal was allowed, and the appellants were granted permission to re-export the goods without penalties. en-us Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Oct 2010 12:20:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53129 The appeal in the case involved the confiscation of goods under Sections 111(d) and (m) of the Customs Act, 1962, and the imposition of penalties under Section 112. The Tribunal found that the confiscation under Sections 111(d) and (m) was not justified as no valid reasons were provided, and the appellants were allowed to re-export the goods based on ownership rights. Consequently, penalties under Section 112 were invalidated. The majority opinion favored the appellants, setting aside the confiscation order and allowing re-export without penalties, while the dissenting opinion argued for confiscation and penalties due to misdeclaration. Ultimately, the appeal was allowed, and the appellants were granted permission to re-export the goods without penalties. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 13 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53129