These two Appeals were admitted to consider the following question of Law:-- "Whether after holding that there was no evidence of misdeclaration on the part of appellant the Custom Appellate Tribunal was justified in imposing 100% redemption fine as a condition precedent for the release of goods."
The learned Tribunal disposed of the appeals stating the following reasons: -- "(4) We have considered the arguments of both the sides. We are inclined to agree with the submissions of the appellant that the appliance under dispute is useable specifically in conjunction with the industries process. There IS tI1us.No case of misdeclaration as the evidence does not exist to show that appellant intentionally did something wrong. The goods are accordingly released on payment of 100% redemption fine on its ascertained value in addition to duty and taxes payable thereon. The appeal is partly accepted as above and the order of the Deputy Collector of Customs Adjudication, Karachi-I is modified to this extent only."
2. Ms. Shaheen, learned counsel for the appellants, contended that the Tribunal after having come to the conclusion that the Fork Lifter imported by the appellants is useable specifically in conjunction with the industrial process and that there was no misdeclaration it should not have imposed redemption fine of 100% in addition to duty and tax payable thereon.
3. Mr. Raja Iqbal in reply contended that the Lifter was a banned item which could not be imported and therefore, the Tribunal was justified in imposing the redemption fine. The department did not fife any appeal against the findings of the Tribunal which Mr. Iqbal is now contending and therefore, his arguments cannot be considered in the circumstances.
4. We are in agreement with the contention of the learned counsel for the appellants that after having come to the conclusion that the 'Fork Lifter' was a part of the wood working machinery and there was no misdeclaration the Tribunal was not justified in imposing the redemption fine.
Accordingly, we answer the question in the negative and declare that the Tribunal was not justified in imposing 100% redemption fine as a condition precedent for the release of the goods.
Both the appeals are allowed in the above terms.
5. Office is directed to send a copy of the decision under Seal of the High Court to the appellate Tribunal to pass such orders as are necessary to dispose of the case in conformity with this decision.