Habitual offender status requires repeated past offences; enhancement of redemption fine and penalty was unjustified here.

Enhancement of redemption fine and penalty was held unjustified where confiscation had already been accepted and the dispute was confined to quantum. The record showed no basis for treating the importer as a habitual offender, because that status requires repeated past instances of the same offence and punishment on more than one occasion, not a single prior incident. No other ground supported increasing the amounts beyond the original levy, so the fine and penalty were correctly restricted to Rs. 2 lakhs and Rs. 20,000 respectively.

---

---

Issues: Whether the enhancement of redemption fine and penalty was justified on the facts, and whether the importer could be treated as a habitual offender for that purpose.

Analysis: The only surviving controversy was the quantum of fine and penalty, as the applicability of confiscation provisions had effectively been accepted. The earlier fine and penalty had already been paid, and the record did not show any basis for enhancing them merely on the footing that the importer was a habitual offender. A person can be so treated only when there are repeated past instances of the same offence and punishment on more than one occasion, not on the basis of a single prior incident. No other reason was shown for increasing the amounts beyond what had been imposed originally.

Conclusion: The enhancement of fine and penalty was not justified. The fine and penalty were correctly restricted to Rs. 2 lakhs and Rs. 20,000 respectively, and the assessee succeeded on this issue.

---