Order date – 12 August 2022

Facts – 

• The appellant, Shimla Fruit Agency filed 3 bills of entry dated 24.8.20221 and 23.8.2021 declaring the goods as ‘unflavoured supari’. They declared the goods to be classified under CTH 21069030 claiming benefit of concessional rate of duty under Sl. No. (i) of Notification No. 96/2008.
• During inspection, it was found that the goods were areca nuts - split which are classifiable under CTH 08028000 which does not qualify to be betel nut product falling under Chapter 21.The samples sent for analysis to CRCL, Chennai reported that the goods are in the form of cut pieces of betel nuts. 
• The appellant had requested for permission to re-export the goods.
• The adjudicating authority rejected the classification declared by the appellant and ordered for confiscation of the goods setting redemption fine of Rs.15 lakhs for the purpose of re-export only along with penalty of Rs. 20 lakhs under sec. 112(a)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 and directed for re-export of the goods within 60 days from the date of receipt of the order. 
• Being aggrieved, the appellant filed this appeal before the Tribunal. 

Issue – 

• Whether imposing of superfluous redemption fine when the goods are redeemed for the purpose of re-export only justifiable?

Order – 

• The Tribunal observed that though the learned counsel has relied upon various decisions to argue that redemption fine cannot be imposed when the goods are redeemed for the purpose of re-export only. However, the Tribunal noted that there is violation of the notification.
• The goods are not to be cleared for home consumption and the appellant has also incurred huge detention-cum-demurrage charges, and thus held that reducing the redemption fine and penalty would only be just.
• Consequently, modified the impugned order by reducing the redemption fine to Rs.4,00,000/- for the purpose of re-export only and also reduced the penalty to Rs.5,00,000/- without disturbing other directions in the order.