#Penalty Liability

CESTAT Kolkata holds that mere control over premises where smuggled gold is found, coupled with inability to prove lawful possession, suffices to impose penalty under Section 112 - shifting the burden to the possessor to explain lawful origin. This clarifies that statutory liability under customs law extends beyond ownership to de facto control, impacting warehouse operators, agents, and third-party custodians.

CESTAT Hyderabad has ruled that a foreign director who orchestrates dual invoicing to suppress import values for Indian customs purposes incurs personal penalty liability under the Customs Act, regardless of territorial presence. This sets a critical precedent for global supply chain actors, confirming that facilitation of customs fraud from abroad triggers Indian enforcement jurisdiction.

The Customs Appellate Tribunal holds that penalty under Section 117 of the Customs Act cannot be imposed without proof of the owner's knowledge of vehicle use in smuggling.