https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440919 The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of imported Arecanut as "prohibited goods" due to not meeting the Minimum Import Price criteria. It found that the subsequent notification exempting Arecanut did not apply retrospectively but noted the Adjudicating Authority erred in not allowing redemption of goods on payment of a fine. The penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs was reduced to Rs. 2 lakhs considering the lack of malafide intention. The Tribunal directed the Authority to provide the appellant with an option to redeem the goods for re-export, leading to a partial allowance of the appeal and remand for further action. en-us Thu, 27 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Jul 2023 11:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440919 The Tribunal upheld the confiscation of imported Arecanut as "prohibited goods" due to not meeting the Minimum Import Price criteria. It found that the subsequent notification exempting Arecanut did not apply retrospectively but noted the Adjudicating Authority erred in not allowing redemption of goods on payment of a fine. The penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs was reduced to Rs. 2 lakhs considering the lack of malafide intention. The Tribunal directed the Authority to provide the appellant with an option to redeem the goods for re-export, leading to a partial allowance of the appeal and remand for further action. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 27 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440919