Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

Appellant's penalties under Sections 112(a)(i), 112(b)(i), and 114AA set aside due to lack of evidence

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....CESTAT allowed appellant's appeal against penalties imposed under Sections 112(a)(i), 112(b)(i), and 114AA of Customs Act, 1962. Department alleged appellant operated as syndicate facilitating clearance of mis-declared/undervalued goods and allowed co-conspirator use of office premises and computer. Tribunal held no evidence substantiated allegations that appellant facilitated clearance of mis-declared goods or was connected with subject goods. Allowing usage of office premises and computer cannot constitute connivance in alleged offence. Investigation failed to establish conditions for invoking penalty provisions under Sections 112 and 114AA. Adjudicating authority's finding that appellant provided assistance in clearance of contraband goods was speculative without evidentiary support. Penalties set aside as unsustainable.....