Tribunal overturns redemption fine and penalty for mis-declared goods, allowing re-export without repercussions.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the decision to impose a redemption fine and penalty for allowing the re-export of mis-declared goods. They found no justification for penalizing the appellant, considering the supplier's acknowledgment of the mistake and absence of collusion. Previous cases supporting re-export without penalty in similar situations were cited, leading to the conclusion that no fine or penalty should be imposed in this case. The Tribunal ultimately permitted the re-export of the goods without any financial repercussions.

---

---

Issues: Whether redemption fine and penalty were warranted while permitting re-export of goods that were found to be different from the goods ordered.

Analysis: The goods were ordered as LDPE, part payment had been made in advance, and the supplier acknowledged that wrong goods had been shipped by mistake and agreed to take them back bearing the costs. The Revenue's suggestion that the import was arranged to evade anti-dumping duty was found to be conjectural. The circumstances showed no collusion or mala fide on the importer's part. In similar wrong-shipment cases, re-export without fine or penalty was found to be appropriate, and the Board's circular also supported re-export where no mala fide is suspected.

Conclusion: Redemption fine and penalty were not justified. The goods were allowed to be re-exported without any fine or penalty, in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the appeal was allowed with permission to re-export the goods without monetary penalty.

Ratio Decidendi: Where imported goods are established to be wrongly shipped by the supplier and the record shows absence of mala fide or collusion by the importer, re-export may be permitted without redemption fine or penalty.

---