Redemption fine enhancement rejected where goods were not notified and no evidence showed unauthorised import.

Redemption fine for release of confiscated goods was not liable to enhancement where the goods were not notified goods under the relevant provisions and the Revenue produced no evidence of unauthorised import. The explanation that the goods had been taken from Delhi for marketing in the north-eastern region and later booked back to Delhi was not rebutted. As the redemption fine was only an option for release of the goods and there was nothing to show that the option remained unexercised, the request to increase the fine was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the redemption fine imposed for release of confiscated goods required enhancement.

Analysis: The goods were not notified goods under the relevant statutory provisions, and the Revenue failed to produce evidence showing that the goods had been brought into India by an unauthorised manner. The explanation that the goods were taken from Delhi for marketing in the north-eastern region and later booked back for Delhi was not rebutted. The redemption fine was merely an option for release of the goods, and there was nothing to show that the option had remained unexercised. In the circumstances, enhancement of the redemption fine was not justified.

Conclusion: The request for increase in redemption fine was rejected.

---