https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122316 The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of goods under Section 111(f) but set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant. The appellant's argument that the ship was bought "as is where is" was rejected, as specific spare parts listed in the Memorandum of Agreement should have been included in the Import General Manifest. The Tribunal reduced the redemption fine from Rs. 60,000 to Rs. 20,000 due to the appellant's lack of involvement in the mis-declaration by the steamer agent. The appeal was disposed of with the reduced redemption fine on 27-4-07. en-us Fri, 27 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Aug 2012 13:06:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122316 The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of goods under Section 111(f) but set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant. The appellant's argument that the ship was bought "as is where is" was rejected, as specific spare parts listed in the Memorandum of Agreement should have been included in the Import General Manifest. The Tribunal reduced the redemption fine from Rs. 60,000 to Rs. 20,000 due to the appellant's lack of involvement in the mis-declaration by the steamer agent. The appeal was disposed of with the reduced redemption fine on 27-4-07. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 27 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122316