Undervaluation of imported goods justified penalty, while enhancement of redemption fine failed for lack of supporting grounds.

Under-declaration of import value justified penalty where the importers failed to explain non-disclosure of the value of platinum sponge consumed in manufacturing the goods, leading to a lower declared value. The finding of undervaluation sustained the penalty. Enhancement of redemption fine and penalty was refused because the Revenue did not provide adequate grounds, including any stated margin of profit, and relied only on the general assertion that the amounts were low compared with the goods' value.

---

---

Issues: Whether the penalty imposed for under-valuation of imported goods was justified, and whether the redemption fine and penalty warranted enhancement at the instance of the Revenue.

Analysis: The importers failed to satisfactorily explain the non-disclosure of the value of platinum sponge consumed in the manufacture of the imported goods, which resulted in a lower declared value. The finding of under-declaration therefore supported the levy of penalty. For enhancement, the Revenue did not furnish adequate grounds, as the memorandum of appeal did not state the margin of profit and relied only on the general contention that the fine and penalty were low compared with the value of the goods.

Conclusion: The penalty was rightly imposed, and no enhancement of the redemption fine or penalty was called for.

---