Proportionate redemption fine under import confiscation law: excessive fine reduced, while penalty was sustained on improper import findings.

Redemption fine on confiscated imported goods must remain proportionate and within the statutory ceiling of market value less duty payable; on the facts, the fine was reduced as the earlier amount was found excessive. The penalty issue turned on the continued finding of improper import and the absence of any basis for complete waiver, so the reduced penalty was left undisturbed. The note reiterates that confiscation-related monetary consequences must reflect the admitted facts and cannot be arbitrary or disproportionate.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the redemption fine imposed on confiscated imported goods was excessive and required reduction; (ii) Whether the penalty sustained by the lower appellate authority called for interference.

Issue (i): Whether the redemption fine imposed on confiscated imported goods was excessive and required reduction.

Analysis: The imported goods were not challenged on valuation, but the assessee questioned only the quantum of redemption fine. The governing principle is that redemption fine cannot be arbitrary or disproportionate and must remain within the statutory limit of the market value less duty payable. As the original order was old and the Revenue had not assailed the relief already granted by the first appellate authority, remand was considered unnecessary. On the facts, a further reduction in the fine was found appropriate to meet the ends of justice.

Conclusion: The redemption fine was reduced to Rs. 3,00,000, in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the penalty sustained by the lower appellate authority called for interference.

Analysis: The assessee had accepted enhancement of value before adjudication and did not specifically dispute the finding that the import was improper. In view of the continued finding of improper import and the absence of a case for complete waiver, interference with penalty was not warranted. Since the Revenue had accepted the reduced penalty fixed by the first appellate authority, that amount was maintained.

Conclusion: The penalty was sustained at Rs. 1,00,000, against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only to the limited extent of reducing the redemption fine, while the penalty and other findings remained undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Redemption fine under confiscation provisions must be proportionate and cannot exceed the statutory ceiling, and interference is justified where the amount imposed is found excessive on the admitted facts.

---