Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether imported drugs found not to meet the prescribed Pharmacopoeia grade were liable to confiscation, and whether redemption fine and penalty were warranted or required reduction.
Analysis: The imported goods did not satisfy the required test grade and were therefore liable to confiscation under the import restriction applicable to drugs not meeting Pharmacopoeia standards. However, the record did not establish any specific knowledge or deliberate intention on the part of the importers to breach the prohibition. In such circumstances, the importers were entitled to the benefit of doubt on intention. Since no margin of profit would arise on re-export, the redemption fine was considered excessive and was reduced to a token amount.
Conclusion: Confiscation was upheld, the penalty was set aside, and the redemption fine was substantially reduced.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only to the extent of relief against penalty and the quantum of redemption fine, while the liability of the goods to confiscation remained undisturbed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where prohibited or non-conforming imported goods are liable to confiscation, penalty requires proof of conscious breach or intention, and in the absence of such intent the importer may be given the benefit of doubt; redemption fine must also be proportionate to the surrounding circumstances.