Separate customs duty demand barred where adjudication fixed only fine and penalty, without determining duty payable.

Where confiscation proceedings end only in redemption fine and penalty, and the earlier adjudication does not determine the duty payable, customs duty cannot later be demanded separately under Section 125(2) of the Customs Act, 1962. The text notes that a subsequent duty demand without a prior adjudication fixing liability lacks support where the show cause notice and order did not quantify or confirm duty. On that basis, the duty demand notices were held liable to be quashed, and the impugned customs duty demands with interest were set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether customs duty could be demanded separately when the earlier adjudication order imposed only redemption fine and penalty and did not determine the duty payable.

Analysis: The interim order recorded a prima facie view that the importers had been released the hospital equipments pursuant to an adjudication order imposing only redemption fine and penalty, with no confirmation of duty demand. It further noted that the subsequent demand for duty was made under Section 125(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 without a prior adjudication determining the duty payable. Reliance was placed on the principle that where the show cause notice and adjudication do not determine duty, a separate duty demand is not sustainable.

Conclusion: The duty demand notices were liable to be quashed and set aside.

Final Conclusion: The petitions succeeded and the impugned customs duty demands with interest were set aside, resulting in relief to the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: Where confiscation proceedings culminate only in fine and penalty and no adjudication determines the duty payable, customs duty cannot later be demanded separately without such determination.

---