Misdeclaration of imported goods justified confiscation, with redemption fine and penalty upheld for deliberate duty evasion.

Misdeclaration of imported goods as to description and value, coupled with repeated prior clearances and an admitted practice, supported a finding of deliberate duty evasion. The consignment contained base station and hard disc items in addition to the declared colour graphic terminals, and the explanation that the excess goods were sent by mistake was found improbable because no return or payment was sought. On these facts, confiscation was justified, and the redemption fine and penalty were not considered disproportionate; the appeal was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the confiscation of the imported goods, along with redemption fine and penalty, was justified on the ground of misdeclaration of description and value, and deliberate evasion of duty.

Analysis: The imported consignment contained base station and hard disc in addition to the declared colour graphic terminals. The appellant had earlier adopted the same method in prior clearances and had admitted the practice in the proceedings. The explanation that the excess goods were sent by mistake was found improbable, since no return or payment for the excess goods was sought by the supplier. The repeated conduct supported the inference that the misdeclaration was deliberate and intended to evade duty. In the overall facts, the redemption fine and penalty were not found disproportionate.

Conclusion: The confiscation, redemption fine and penalty were upheld and the appeal was rejected.

---