Goods liable for confiscation can be released on payment of redemption fine

Classic Interiors Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi)

CESTAT Delhi held that after adjudication if the goods are held liable for confiscation, they may be released on payment of redemption fine.

Facts- The appellant imported some goods. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence received intelligence that the goods were mis-declared in terms of value and also in terms of percentage of polyvinyl chloride. During investigation, the goods were seized u/s. 110 of the Customs Act, 19627 by Seizure Memo dated 26.07.2019; the appellant sought provisional release of the goods u/s. 110A.

After considering the submissions made by the appellant the Additional Commissioner passed the order of provisional release. Aggrieved, the appellant appealed the Commissioner (Appeals) who passed the impugned order partially allowing the appellant’s appeal by reducing the bank guarantee for provisional release to 10% of the value of the goods but otherwise upholding the order of the Additional Commissioner. Aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.

Conclusion- Held that after adjudication, if the goods are held liable for confiscation, they may be released on payment of redemption fine. The present case of provisional release of goods needs to be seen in this context. If the goods are confiscated and allowed redemption on payment of fine such fine has to be recovered from the appellant and some security is necessary to cover it if the goods are to be released provisionally before adjudication itself. Considering the overall factual matrix of this case we modify the impugned order reducing the amount of bank guarantee to 5% of the value of the goods.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.