Successful appeal in customs case over redemption fine and penalty for steel import; mis-declaration claims dismissed.

The appellant successfully appealed against the imposition of redemption fine and penalty in a customs case involving the importation of steel strips. The mis-declaration and mis-classification claims were deemed unsustainable, leading to the dismissal of penalties. As no mis-declaration was found, no redemption fine was imposed, and the penalty under Section 112(a) was also found inapplicable due to the absence of deliberate violations. The Tribunal emphasized penalties for deliberate violations, which were not present in this case, resulting in the dismissal of penalties. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal against imposition of redemption fine and penalty.

Analysis:
The appellant, engaged in trading of various steel sheets, imported lamination cores declared under RITC No. 85049010. A Chartered Engineer's report indicated the steel strips could be used for making transformer cores, challenging the mis-declaration claim. The Adjudicating Authority alleged mis-declaration, leading to a show cause notice for duty demand, redemption fine, and penalty. The appellant sought re-export during proceedings, allowed on payment of fine and penalty. The appellant argued proper classification based on supplier's declaration and Chartered Engineer's report. The Assistant Commissioner's report supported the steel strips' utility for transformer cores, undermining mis-declaration charges. Mis-declaration and mis-classification claims were deemed unsustainable. Goods were held liable for confiscation under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, but as no mis-declaration was found, no redemption fine was imposed. Citing a Supreme Court case, redemption fine was deemed inapplicable for re-exported goods. The penalty under Section 112(a) was found inapplicable as the goods were not prohibited, and no deliberate violation was evident. The Tribunal emphasized penalties for deliberate violations, which were absent in this case, leading to penalty dismissal. Consequently, redemption fine and penalty were deemed inapplicable, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal with consequential relief.

---