https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=802156 Penalty under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 requires proof that a domestic purchaser knew or had reason to believe that imported machinery was liable to confiscation. Knowledge that machinery was imported is not sufficient, and the buyer-beware principle does not displace the customs department's burden to prove the statutory requirements. A domestic purchase on invoices, without an exemption claim or proven involvement in the importer's alleged misdeclaration, does not support a penalty in the absence of the requisite knowledge or reason to believe. en-us Fri, 30 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Nov 2026 08:31:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=802156 Penalty under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 requires proof that a domestic purchaser knew or had reason to believe that imported machinery was liable to confiscation. Knowledge that machinery was imported is not sufficient, and the buyer-beware principle does not displace the customs department's burden to prove the statutory requirements. A domestic purchase on invoices, without an exemption claim or proven involvement in the importer's alleged misdeclaration, does not support a penalty in the absence of the requisite knowledge or reason to believe. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 30 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=802156