#admissibility of statements

CESTAT rules that statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act cannot be used for customs valuation or penalty imposition unless they are formally admitted in evidence through witness examination under Section 138B. This holding reinforces procedural safeguards in customs investigations, impacting how digital and documentary evidence is treated in adjudication.

CESTAT Chennai ruled that statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act cannot be relied upon for customs valuation or penalty imposition unless the mandatory procedure under Section 138B is followed. This holding reinforces procedural safeguards for importers and beneficial owners, limiting arbitrary reliance on uncorroborated statements in customs disputes.

The Customs Appellate Tribunal holds that penalty under Section 112 cannot be imposed solely on statements recorded under Section 108 without complying with mandatory admissibility procedures under Section 138B.

The Customs Appellate Tribunal holds that where gold lacks foreign marking and the accused is not the possessor or owner, the burden under Section 123 shifts to the Revenue.