2017 (2) TMI 186

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the Customs Act, 1962. However, since the goods were not available for confiscation, the same were not confiscated and hence no redemption fine was imposed. Aggrieved by this order, the Revenue is in appeal. 2. Learned AR relied on the grounds of appeal. In the grounds of appeal, reliance has been placed on the decision of Tribunal in the case of Vibhuti Exports  2006 (194) ELT 195 (Tri-Del). Reliance has also been placed on the following case laws: - (a) Dadha Pharma Pvt. Ltd.  2000 (126) ELT 53 (b) Weston Components Ltd.  2000 (115) ELT 278 (SC) (c) G.M. Exports  2006 (198) ELT 354 (Tri-Bang) (d) Harbans Lal  1993 (67) ELT 20 (SC) 3. No one appeared for the respondent.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed would not take away the power of the Customs authority to levy redemption fine. The goods not being available for custody does not mean that the redemption cannot be imposed was an argument of the assessee before the Supreme Court which came to be rejected. The Division Bench then held that the redemption fine is a concept which arises in the event the goods are available and are to be redeemed. If the goods are not available there is no question of redemption of the goods. 17. We find that the Division Bench relied upon Section 125 of the Customs Act in that regard. Whenever confiscation of any goods is authorized by the Customs Act, the officer adjudging it may, in the case of any goods, the importation or exportation whereof ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n 125 also does not suffer from such serious legal infirmity or perversity which would warrant our interference in further appellate jurisdiction. Once the export obligation is discharged, then, it is the later part of Section 125(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 which will be applicable. In this case, the goods being of the later category but they were not available once the export obligation is discharged by the assessee. While clarifying that the Tribunal found that the custody of the goods has not been seized nor the possession taken and they were not available for confiscation, then, the question of redemption fine which is essentially a option to pay in lieu of confiscation would not arise. The term redemption appears to have been coined b....