Appellate customs orders remain binding without a stay, and detention cannot continue merely because revision is pending.

A subordinate customs authority must implement an appellate order setting aside absolute confiscation and permitting redemption for re-export when no stay has been granted in revision. Mere pendency of proceedings under Section 129DD of the Customs Act does not suspend the appellate order or justify continued detention of the goods. Applying judicial discipline, the Court held that the respondent could not ignore the appellate relief and directed release of the detained gold for re-export, subject to compliance with the redemption fine and penalty conditions imposed in appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondent was bound to implement the appellate order and release the detained gold for re-export despite the pendency of revision proceedings without a stay order.

Analysis: The appellate authority had set aside absolute confiscation and permitted redemption of the goods for re-export on payment of redemption fine and penalty. The respondent relied on the pendency of revision under Section 129DD of the Customs Act, 1962, but no stay order or proof of effective interim protection was produced. The Court applied the principle of judicial discipline and reiterated that a subordinate authority cannot disregard an appellate order merely because a further challenge has been filed. It also relied on the settled rule that mere filing of an appeal or revision does not suspend the operation of the order appealed against.

Conclusion: The respondent was directed to comply with the appellate order and release the goods for re-export, subject to the conditions imposed by the appellate authority.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded to the extent of enforcement of the appellate relief, while the release of the goods remained conditional on compliance with the redemption and penalty terms imposed in appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of a stay, an appellate order passed by the competent customs authority is binding on the subordinate officer and must be implemented, since the mere filing of a revision does not justify continued detention of the goods.

---