Court quashes redemption fine demand against charitable trust due to lack of notice

The court held that the Department's attempts to recover the redemption fine from the petitioners, a charitable trust engaged in philanthropic activities, were unjustified. The lack of specific mention in the show cause notice and order-in-original regarding the trust's liability for the fine rendered the recovery efforts baseless. As a result, the communications demanding payment of the redemption fine were quashed, and the petitioners were relieved of the obligation to pay any amount as a fine in lieu of confiscation of goods.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge of recovery of redemption fine and declaration of non-liability to pay any amount as fine in lieu of confiscation of goods.

Analysis:
The petitioners challenged the recovery of redemption fine and sought a declaration of non-liability to pay any amount as fine in lieu of confiscation of goods. The petitioners, a charitable trust engaged in philanthropic activities, were involved in an import operation aimed at aiding earthquake victims. A show cause notice was issued, proposing confiscation of goods and imposition of fine in lieu of confiscation under the Customs Act. The adjudicating authority ordered absolute confiscation of goods and imposed a fine in lieu of confiscation. An appeal was made to the CESTAT, which set aside the penalty but did not address the redemption fine issue. Subsequently, the Department issued notices demanding payment of the redemption fine. The petitioners contended that they were not directly involved in the import and should not be held liable for the redemption fine.

The show cause notice did not specifically mention the petitioner trust's liability for the redemption fine. The order-in-original also did not indicate that the trust was responsible for paying the fine in lieu of confiscation. The lack of a proposal in the show cause notice for imposing the fine on the petitioner trust and the absence of directions in the order-in-original regarding the trust's liability rendered the Department's attempts to recover the fine from the petitioners unjustified. Consequently, the communications demanding payment of the redemption fine were quashed, and the petition was allowed to that extent and disposed of.

---