Misdeclaration and concealed goods justified redemption fine and penalty where admissions and physical evidence showed importer knowledge.

Goods declared as aluminium scrap were found to contain concealed cadmium sticks and mixed broken zinc die castings in substantial quantities, indicating deliberate concealment and misdeclaration. The statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act contained an admission that different goods had been sent with the importer's knowledge, and the later retraction was treated as belated and unsupported by proof of coercion. A subsequent statement reiterated the original admission, and the physical evidence of concealment corroborated the confession. On these facts, the Tribunal found knowledge and complicity established, rejected the reliance on cited precedents, and upheld the confiscation-related redemption fine and penalty.

---

---

Issues: Whether the confiscation-related redemption fine and penalty were justified in view of the importer's challenge to the alleged misdeclaration and the retraction of the statement recorded under customs law.

Analysis: The goods declared as aluminium scrap were found on examination to contain concealed cadmium sticks and mixed broken zinc die castings in substantial quantities, showing a deliberate design to evade detection. The statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 contained a clear admission that the supplier had sent different goods with the importer's knowledge, and the later retraction was treated as belated and unsupported by proof of coercion. The subsequent statement reiterated the original admission, and the factual pattern of concealment corroborated the confession. On these facts, the Tribunal held that the importer's knowledge and complicity were established and that the cited precedents did not assist the appellant.

Conclusion: The challenge to the redemption fine and penalty failed, and the confiscation-related monetary liabilities were upheld.

---