https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52076 Confiscation under customs law was confined to the undeclared goods, not the entire consignment, and redemption fine could not be imposed on goods already cleared and unavailable for confiscation. Duty could not be demanded on goods that were confiscated but not redeemed, so the demand had to be restricted to the sustainable portion. The penalty under section 114A was reduced as excessive on the facts, while the penalty under section 112(a) for pre-28-9-1996 imports was maintained and the personal penalty on the managing director was reduced. The stated principle is that redemption fine cannot be levied on goods not available for confiscation, and confiscation must match the specific misdeclared goods. en-us Tue, 09 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Aug 2024 13:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52076 Confiscation under customs law was confined to the undeclared goods, not the entire consignment, and redemption fine could not be imposed on goods already cleared and unavailable for confiscation. Duty could not be demanded on goods that were confiscated but not redeemed, so the demand had to be restricted to the sustainable portion. The penalty under section 114A was reduced as excessive on the facts, while the penalty under section 112(a) for pre-28-9-1996 imports was maintained and the personal penalty on the managing director was reduced. The stated principle is that redemption fine cannot be levied on goods not available for confiscation, and confiscation must match the specific misdeclared goods. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 09 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52076