Pre-shipment inspection certificate disputes require complete factual proof before confiscation, redemption fine, or penalties can stand.

The requirement of a pre-shipment inspection certificate serves security-related import controls, but later debarment of the issuing agency is not, by itself, conclusive proof that an earlier certificate was false or invalid. Where the record does not show whether the imported goods were actually examined after import, or what that examination revealed, confiscability, redemption fine and penalty cannot be properly determined. On that incomplete factual basis, the confiscation and consequential penalties were set aside and the matter remanded for de novo consideration after hearing the importers.

---

---

Issues: Whether the confiscation, redemption fine and penalties could be sustained when the genuineness of the pre-shipment inspection certificate and the effect of the import examination were not properly established.

Analysis: The requirement of a pre-shipment inspection certificate is intended to address security concerns, but the mere fact that an issuing agency was later debarred could not by itself be treated as conclusive proof that a certificate issued earlier was not genuine. The order also did not disclose whether the goods were actually examined after import and, if so, what the result of such examination was. In the absence of these material facts, a proper determination on confiscability, redemption fine and penalty could not be made. The matter therefore required fresh examination on a complete factual record.

Conclusion: The confiscation and consequential penalties were set aside and the matter was remanded for de novo consideration after hearing the appellants.

---