Redemption in lieu of absolute confiscation applied where imported goods were confiscable but outright forfeiture was disproportionate.

Imported electronic goods were found liable to confiscation because violations of Chapter IVA of the Customs Act were admitted and the evidence for some items did not establish lawful importation, while certain receipts could not be properly linked to the seized goods. For one item, a matching receipt and model number meant the document could not be rejected merely because it stood in another name. Although confiscability was sustained, absolute confiscation was considered unduly harsh because the goods were used for professional purposes, so redemption on payment of fine was directed instead of outright forfeiture. The penalty was also sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the absolute confiscation of the imported electronic goods was justified, and whether the goods should instead be permitted to be redeemed on payment of fine.

Analysis: Violations of Chapter IVA of the Customs Act were admitted, and the confiscation was therefore sustained. The evidence produced for one item failed to show licit importation, and for the disputed VCPs the receipts either did not tally with the model numbers or could not satisfactorily be linked to the seized goods. In one instance, however, the absence of discrepancy in the receipt and model number meant that the receipt could not be ignored merely because it stood in another name. At the same time, the goods were being used for professional purposes, and absolute confiscation was found to be unduly harsh in the circumstances.

Conclusion: The confiscation was upheld, but the goods were directed to be released on redemption fine of Rs. 18,500 in addition to duty payable, and the penalty was sustained.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only to the extent of substituting redemption on payment of fine for absolute confiscation, while maintaining the finding of confiscability and the penalty.

Ratio Decidendi: Where confiscation is otherwise warranted but the goods are capable of lawful redemption and the circumstances make absolute confiscation disproportionate, redemption on payment of fine may be directed instead of absolute confiscation.

---