AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1991 (5) TMI 79
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....after a short stay. She filed baggage declaration No. 506 dated 3-5-1989 for clearance of her unaccompanied baggage consisting of eleven items. She declared the value of the goods at Rs. 7150/-. The customs authorities after due enquiries refixed the value of the goods at Rs. 3,71,000/-. Further proceedings initiated in the matter culminated into the order-in-original No. S/I/UB-2423/89/90-P, dated 7-9-1989 whereby Deputy Collector of Customs, Bombay confiscated the said goods but allowed the same to be redeemed on payment of a fine of Rs. 2,70,000/-. A personal penalty of Rs. 35,000/- was also imposed on her. 3. Aggrieved by the said order she went in appeal before the Collector (Appeals) who by his impugned order allowed the subject go....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the respondent in adjudication as also by their conduct in not filing any revision application. 6. The review has been sought by the applicant on the ground that the facility of re-export in terms of Section 80 of Customs Act, 1962 is available to a passenger only if he/she has given a true declaration of the baggage and secondly that re-export under Section 80 of the Customs Act, 1962, is permissible only if the passenger is leaving India whereas in the present case the passenger is a normal resident of India. 7. Government observe that undoubtedly re-export of goods can be allowed under Section 80 of the Customs Act, 1962, but without any fine/penalty, which, in turn, may be permitted only when there is a true declaration. There....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uthority has various alternatives before him. These include absolute confiscation, redemption for home consumption or redemption for re-export, both on fine and with or without conditions. 11. The adjudicating authority having discretion to give option for redemption of goods has to address himself to the question whether or not the discretion should be exercised having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case (AIR 1987 Supreme Court 1982). In the instant case the Deputy Collector has already held it to be a fit case for permitting redemption of goods on payment of fine, penalties and duty. He did not opt for absolute confiscation and nor acceded to the party's request for permitting re-export of the goods. It is nobody's ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l letter dated 16-6-1989 she has stated that these gifts were given by different persons and in the statement recorded by the Customs Officers, she has stated that these gifts were given by Shri Gurmukh Israni who also confirmed in his letter dated 29-6-1989". It seems no corrigendum was issued by the office of the Deputy Collector. Nevertheless Government finds that there is hardly any inconsistency in the two versions because in her letter dated 16-6-1989 the respondent had stated that her husband's fans have presented gifts and the same have been sent by her as unaccompanied baggage. In her statement dated 23-6-1989 she has given specific name alongwith the address of the donor. Government does not see any inconsistency in the two versio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rments of the party along with the fact that the demurrage would have further gone up during the pendency of appeal would only indicate that the option for home consumption as given by the Deputy Collector has by now become even more delusory. In the circumstances Government is not averse to permitting re-export of goods specially as the original authority has itself opted for lesser onerous option (compared to absolute confiscation) of home consumption, which, as stated above, seems to be illusory. While taking this view Government takes note of the fact that party had correctly declared the description of goods and only valuation has been - though substantially - a dispute. Further they had reconciled to re-export the goods and did not, t....