Bona fide misdescription in shipping bills defeats confiscation, though a reduced penalty may still follow for initial misdeclaration.

An incorrect export description in shipping bills was treated as a bona fide error where the exporter itself sought amendment and correction, and the department did not satisfactorily rebut that explanation. On those facts, confiscation and redemption fine were not sustainable because deliberate misdeclaration was not established. The initial misdescription nevertheless justified a reduced penalty for the incorrect declaration, reflecting that some punitive consequence could still follow the lapse even though confiscation was unwarranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the exported goods were liable to confiscation and whether penalty was warranted for the incorrect description given in the shipping bills.

Analysis: The incorrect declaration was not shown to be deliberate, and the record included requests made to amend the shipping bill and to correct the description. In the absence of a satisfactory rebuttal by the department to the explanation that the error was bona fide and was pointed out by the exporter itself, confiscation was not justified. However, the initial misdescription supported imposition of some penalty.

Conclusion: The confiscation and redemption fine were set aside, and the penalty was reduced to Rs. 10,000.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the incorrect export description is shown to be a bona fide error voluntarily brought to the notice of the department, confiscation is not sustainable, though a reduced penalty may still be imposed for the initial misdeclaration.

---