Absolute confiscation may stand without redemption where concealed goods are treated as prohibited or restriction-breaching baggage goods.

Absolute confiscation of concealed cut and polished diamonds and pendants was considered sustainable because the goods were treated as prohibited or commercially restricted baggage goods tainted by concealment and fraud. The Tribunal stated that Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 gives the adjudicating authority discretion to allow redemption, but that option is not mandatory in every case. Where the facts disclose concealment, fraud, or breach of import restrictions, the authority may order absolute confiscation without granting redemption fine. The confiscation was therefore confirmed and no redemption option was directed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the absolute confiscation of cut and polished diamonds and pendants under the Customs Act, 1962 was sustainable without granting an option of redemption under Section 125.

Analysis: The goods were found concealed and were treated as commercially restricted baggage goods. The Tribunal noted that Section 125 confers discretion in cases involving prohibited goods, and that absolute confiscation can be justified where the facts disclose concealment, fraud, or non-fulfilment of import restrictions. Reliance was placed on earlier decisions recognising that the redemption option is not mandatory in every case and that the adjudicating authority may direct absolute confiscation where the circumstances warrant such a course.

Conclusion: The absolute confiscation was upheld and no redemption option was directed. The appeal failed and the order of confiscation stood confirmed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the import is treated as prohibited or tainted by concealment or fraud, the adjudicating authority may, in its discretion under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962, order absolute confiscation without granting redemption fine.

---