Abandonment of imported goods defeats Customs penalty when title is relinquished and redemption is not sought.

Abandonment of imported goods and relinquishment of title, without exercise of the redemption option, was treated as sufficient to negate penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal followed its earlier coordinate Bench ruling and applied judicial discipline, noting that no contrary authority was shown and that the goods had been abandoned before the show cause notice, with the Commissioner recording that fact. On those facts, the penalty was held unsustainable and consequential relief followed.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 was imposable where the imported goods were abandoned, title was relinquished, and the option to redeem the goods was not exercised.

Analysis: The Tribunal followed its earlier coordinate Bench ruling that once imported goods are abandoned and the importer relinquishes title without redeeming the goods, penalty under Section 112(a) is not attracted. No contrary decision was shown for the Revenue, and judicial discipline required application of the earlier ratio to the facts, where the abandonment had occurred even before the show cause notice and the Commissioner had recorded that the goods were abandoned.

Conclusion: The penalty imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 was set aside and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.

Final Conclusion: The decision holds that abandonment of imported goods and non-exercise of the redemption option negates the levy of penalty under the cited provision on the facts found.

Ratio Decidendi: Where imported goods are abandoned and title is relinquished without redemption being sought, penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 is not sustainable.

---