2014 (8) TMI 12

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 confiscated goods, the law provides for payment of fine in lieu of confiscation which is popularly known as redemption fine. Therefore, whether the bond executed by the assessee is in force; whether the bank guarantee executed for due compliance of the bond is in force or not; whether goods are in possession of the authority or not; whether the goods in existence or not on the day when order was passed is totally irrelevant - Once that finding is recorded in lieu of confiscation of the goods and option is given to the assessee to pay confiscation fine ie., redemption fine to retain the goods - decided in favour of Revenue.
N Kumar And B Manohar, JJ. For the Appellant : Sri Jeevan J Neeralgi, Adv. For the Respondent : None JUD .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... were released on the assessee executing a bond as well as executing a bank guarantee. Therefore, imposed the redemption fine in lieu of confiscation. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal was of the view that the bond and the bank guarantee executed in favour of the Revenue expired and the goods were not in the possession of the Authorities. In those circumstances, the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Weston Components Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi reported in 2000 (115) E.L.T.278 (S.C.) is not applicable and therefore, set-aside the imposition of redemption fine. Aggrieved by the said order, the revenue is in appeal. 4. Though notice was served on the respo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... xecuted by the assessee is in force; whether the bank guarantee executed for due compliance of the bond is in force or not; whether goods are in possession of the authority or not; whether the goods in existence or not on the day when order was passed is totally irrelevant. The question for consideration is whether the assessee has contravened the law and the goods are liable for confiscation?. Once that finding is recorded in lieu of confiscation of the goods and option is given to the assessee to pay confiscation fine ie., redemption fine to retain the goods. In that view of the matter, the finding recorded by the Tribunal relying on its earlier judgment is erroneous, runs counter to the judgment and law laid down by the Apex Court in the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X