https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194259 The Court quashed the orders imposing the redemption fee and penalty, citing binding precedents that redemption fine, interest, and duty could only be imposed if the owner chose to pay a fine in lieu of confiscation under Section 125 of the Customs Act. As the petitioner opted for confiscation without paying a fine, the orders imposing fees and penalties were unsustainable. The Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the contested orders and upholding legal principles outlined in previous judgments. en-us Wed, 29 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Sep 2017 11:14:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194259 The Court quashed the orders imposing the redemption fee and penalty, citing binding precedents that redemption fine, interest, and duty could only be imposed if the owner chose to pay a fine in lieu of confiscation under Section 125 of the Customs Act. As the petitioner opted for confiscation without paying a fine, the orders imposing fees and penalties were unsustainable. The Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the contested orders and upholding legal principles outlined in previous judgments. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 29 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194259