https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=802020 Penalty for alleged evasion of anti-dumping duty through routing Chinese-origin goods via Malaysia requires legally admissible proof that certificates of origin were false, unauthorised or discrepant, and that the person penalised knew of or aided the contravention. The alleged procurement of false certificates must be supported by reliable evidence and prescribed verification of the certificates. Electronic material lacking evidentiary admissibility, retracted statements, and statements relied upon without cross-examination despite statutory safeguards cannot establish the requisite knowledge, involvement or abetment for penalty under Section 112(a)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962. en-us Thu, 15 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Oct 2026 08:12:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=802020 Penalty for alleged evasion of anti-dumping duty through routing Chinese-origin goods via Malaysia requires legally admissible proof that certificates of origin were false, unauthorised or discrepant, and that the person penalised knew of or aided the contravention. The alleged procurement of false certificates must be supported by reliable evidence and prescribed verification of the certificates. Electronic material lacking evidentiary admissibility, retracted statements, and statements relied upon without cross-examination despite statutory safeguards cannot establish the requisite knowledge, involvement or abetment for penalty under Section 112(a)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 15 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=802020