https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43143 Confiscation of imported goods, along with redemption fine and penalty, was said to be unsustainable where the Customs Authority acted on an erroneous factual assumption, ignored the supplier's certificate and the request for mutilation, and failed to apply Section 24 of the Customs Act, 1962. The text also notes that confiscation of the entire consignment under Section 119 required a factual finding that the offending goods were used to conceal the remaining goods, and no such foundation was recorded. The order was set aside, with release of non-offending scrap, mutilation of buttons or snap fasteners on security, and fresh adjudication after hearing the importer. en-us Mon, 22 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Jun 2010 13:19:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43143 Confiscation of imported goods, along with redemption fine and penalty, was said to be unsustainable where the Customs Authority acted on an erroneous factual assumption, ignored the supplier's certificate and the request for mutilation, and failed to apply Section 24 of the Customs Act, 1962. The text also notes that confiscation of the entire consignment under Section 119 required a factual finding that the offending goods were used to conceal the remaining goods, and no such foundation was recorded. The order was set aside, with release of non-offending scrap, mutilation of buttons or snap fasteners on security, and fresh adjudication after hearing the importer. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 22 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43143