Tribunal allows re-export of abandoned goods due to mis-declaration, emphasizing redemption fine for packaging mix-up

The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on importers for mis-declaration of goods, confiscation, and penalty imposition, as they abandoned the goods upon discovering the discrepancy. The Tribunal allowed re-export on payment of a redemption fine, considering the mix-up in packaging and difficulty in determining the quantity of shirts inside the packages. The decision emphasized previous judgments permitting re-export in similar cases and cited the supplier's admission of the mistake as supporting evidence for the abandonment of goods.

---

---

Issues: Mis-declaration of goods, Confiscation of goods, Penalty imposition, Request for re-export, Abandonment of goods

Mis-declaration of goods:
The case involved two appeals against the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai, which held imported goods as different from the declaration. Undeclared items were found concealed behind the packages of towels and rubber slippers. The importers abandoned the goods upon realizing the mix-up, leading to a show cause notice and subsequent adjudication by the Commissioner.

Confiscation of goods and Penalty imposition:
The Commissioner fixed the assessable value of the goods, ordered confiscation under Customs Act sections 111(l) & (m), and imposed penalties under section 112(a). The appellants challenged these actions, arguing that the importers abandoned the goods upon discovering the discrepancy, and the supplier admitted to the wrong packings.

Request for re-export:
The supplier requested re-export of the goods without fine or penalty, citing mix-up in packaging and difficulty in determining the quantity of shirts inside the packages. The Tribunal considered previous judgments allowing re-export in similar situations and upheld the order of confiscation while allowing re-export on payment of a redemption fine.

Abandonment of goods:
The Tribunal noted that the importers abandoned the goods upon realizing the mix-up, as confirmed by the supplier's admission of the mistake. Citing precedent where no penalty is imposed when importers abandon goods, the Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the importers and allowed their appeal.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues of mis-declaration, confiscation, penalty imposition, the request for re-export, and abandonment of goods, providing a comprehensive overview of the legal proceedings and the Tribunal's decision.

---