IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CUSTOMS APPEAL NO. 45 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Customs (Exports). ... Appellant. V/s. M/s.Sudarshan Cargo Pvt.Ltd. and another. ... Respondents. WITH CUSTOMS APPEAL NO. 46 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Customs (Exports). ... Appellant. V/s. M/s.Karim & Sons and others. ... Respondents. WITH CUSTOMS APPEAL NO. 47 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Customs (Exports). ... Appellant. V/s. M/s.Hindalco Industries Ltd. ... Respondent. R.Ashokan with S.D.Bhosale for the appellant. None for the respondents (in CUAPP NO.45/2010). Anil Balani for the respondent (in CUAPP NO.46/2010). V.Sridharan with Prakash Shah i/b. PDS Legal for the respondent (in CUAPP NO.47/2010). CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND S.J.KATHAWALLA, JJ. DATED : 6th July 2010. P.C. : Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents. Perused appeals. 2. The view taken by the Tribunal is in consonance with the judgment of this Court in case of the Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. M/s.Finesse Creation Inc. passed in Customs Appeal No.66/2009 dated 25th August, 2009 (unreported). 3. So far as waiver of redemption fine is concerned, in our opinion, the concept of redemption fine arises in the event the goods are available and are to be redeemed. If the goods are not available, there is no question of redemption of the goods. Under Section 125 a power is conferred on the Customs Authorities in case import of goods becoming prohibited on account of breach of the provisions of the Act, rules or notification, to order confiscation of the goods with a discretion in the authorities on passing the order of confiscation, to release the goods on payment of redemption fine. Such an order can only be passed if the goods are available, for redemption. The question of confiscating the goods would not arise if there are no goods available for confiscation nor consequently redemption. Once goods cannot be redeemed no fine can be imposed. The fine is in the nature of compensation to the state for the wrong done by the importer/exporter. 4. So far as waiver of fine on CHA and Exporter and reduction of penalty on the Steamer Company are concerned, the reasons recorded by the Tribunal cannot be faulted. The view taken by the Tribunal is a reasonable and possible view. In this view of the matter, no substantial question of law is involved. All the appeals are dismissed in limine with no order as to costs. (S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.) (V.C.DAGA J.)