https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53786 The Tribunal upheld the liability to confiscation of goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 but noted the absence of Margin of Profit (MOP) determination under Section 125. As the goods were not for sale, a commercial MOP was deemed unnecessary. The heavy redemption fine was reduced to a token amount of Rs. 1,000 for re-export. The Tribunal found the clearance of goods on the fine imposed unjustifiable due to the absence of MOP determination. The penalty imposed by the Commissioner was upheld, but the redemption fine was significantly reduced considering the circumstances and approval for re-export. en-us Tue, 04 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 Oct 2010 12:01:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53786 The Tribunal upheld the liability to confiscation of goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 but noted the absence of Margin of Profit (MOP) determination under Section 125. As the goods were not for sale, a commercial MOP was deemed unnecessary. The heavy redemption fine was reduced to a token amount of Rs. 1,000 for re-export. The Tribunal found the clearance of goods on the fine imposed unjustifiable due to the absence of MOP determination. The penalty imposed by the Commissioner was upheld, but the redemption fine was significantly reduced considering the circumstances and approval for re-export. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 04 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53786