Redemption fine remains valid for misdeclared imports even after release when confiscation and differential duty survive.

Imported goods held liable to confiscation for misdeclaration remained subject to redemption fine even after release, because the test report supported the Revenue's classification and the importer failed to secure an accepted retest. The Tribunal held that release of the goods did not extinguish the power to impose redemption fine where differential duty was recoverable on account of misdeclaration. The impugned order was modified only to add redemption fine, while confiscation and differential duty were left undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether redemption fine was leviable on goods found liable to confiscation on account of misdeclaration and consequential differential duty.

Analysis: The imported goods were held liable to confiscation after the test report supported the Revenue's classification and the importer did not successfully secure an accepted retest. The order under challenge had already upheld confiscation and the levy of differential duty. In that situation, the Tribunal held that release of the goods did not take away the power to impose redemption fine, and that the existence of recoverable differential duty on account of misdeclaration supported such levy. A redemption fine of Rs. 10 lakhs was found and the impugned order was modified only to that extent.

Conclusion: Redemption fine was rightly imposable, and the Revenue's appeal was allowed to that extent.

Final Conclusion: The order in original was modified by adding redemption fine while leaving the rest undisturbed, resulting in success for the Revenue.

Ratio Decidendi: Where imported goods are held liable to confiscation for misdeclaration and the consequential duty liability survives, redemption fine can validly be imposed even if the goods have been released.

---