Assessable value enhancement and penal confiscation fail where no mala fide misdeclaration is proved and duty is paid on transaction value.

Enhancement of imported goods' assessable value was held unsustainable where adjudication gave no recorded reasons, the importer's consent was not obtained, and duty had been discharged on transaction value. The EPCG licence was later amended to cover the imported quantity, and the record did not show deliberate misdeclaration of description, specification, or quantity with mala fide intent. On that basis, confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty were also found unsustainable, and the lower appellate authority's setting aside of the adjudication order was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the enhancement of assessable value, confiscation of the goods, and imposition of redemption fine and penalty were sustainable where the import under the EPCG Scheme was subsequently regularised, the duty liability was discharged on the transaction value, and no mala fide misdeclaration was established.

Analysis: The value had been enhanced in adjudication without recording reasons and without obtaining the importer's consent, contrary to the applicable departmental circular. The record also showed discharge of duty on the transaction value. The licence under the EPCG Scheme had been amended to cover the imported quantity, and the proceedings did not disclose any deliberate misdeclaration of description, specification, or quantity with mala fide intent.

Conclusion: The enhancement of value and the consequential confiscation, redemption fine, and penalty were not sustainable.

Final Conclusion: The appeal by the Revenue failed and the order of the lower appellate authority setting aside the adjudication order was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Enhancement of import value must rest on recorded reasons and lawful process, and in the absence of proved mala fide misdeclaration, confiscation and penal consequences cannot be sustained.

---