Judge grants relief in appeal, overturning redemption fine and penalties on misdeclared imported goods.

The judge allowed the appeal, setting aside the confirmation of redemption fine and penalties imposed on imported goods misdeclared under the DEEC Scheme as "Natural Rubber SVR 10." The appellant had taken necessary precautions, did not intentionally violate any provisions, and had no malicious intent. The judge emphasized the appellant's due diligence and distinguished the case from precedents cited by the Departmental Representative. Relying on legal precedents, the judge concluded that the redemption fine and penalty were not justified in this instance, granting relief to the appellant.

---

---

Issues:
Confirmation of redemption fine and penalty on imported goods under DEEC Scheme misdeclared as Natural Rubber SVR 10.

Analysis:
The appellant imported goods declared as "Natural Rubber SVR 10" under the DEEC Scheme, which were later found to not conform to the BIS Specification for technical specified natural rubber (TSNR) with respect to dirt, ash, and PRI. The goods were confiscated, and a redemption fine and penalties were imposed. The appellant appealed against the confirmation of these fines and penalties.

The appellant argued that they had placed a purchase order with their foreign supplier for the goods under the DEEC Scheme, obtained an advance license, and had a sales contract specifying the quality of the goods. The foreign supplier provided a certificate of quality analysis, confirming the goods as per the purchase order. When the goods were found to be not up to BIS standard, the appellant immediately informed the supplier, who admitted the mistake and advised re-export. The appellant contended that redemption fine and penalty were not justified, citing legal precedents where redemption fine was not imposed in cases of re-export of goods.

The Departmental Representative (DR) argued that the goods were misdeclared and restricted, justifying the confiscation and penalties. The DR relied on a tribunal decision stating that restrictions on export of goods amount to prohibition when export conditions are not met. The DR emphasized that the goods were misdeclared as Natural Rubber SVR 10 and did not meet BIS specifications, supporting the imposition of fines and penalties.

After hearing both sides, the judge found that the appellant had taken all necessary precautions before importation, had not deliberately violated any provisions, and had no mala fide intentions. The judge distinguished the case from precedents cited by the DR, emphasizing the appellant's due diligence. Relying on legal precedents, the judge concluded that redemption fine and penalty were not sustainable in this case. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief, if any.

---