2015 (12) TMI 1300 - HC - Customs

Detention of goods - Provisional release of goods - Misuse of IEC Code - misdeclaration related to Superior and Fantastic brands were found - Undervaluation of goods - Held that - Goods in question are freely importable goods and there is no restriction or prohibition for the same. When the SIIB by de-stuffing the goods inspected and found that the description and weight are fully tallied with the declaration, there is no justifiable reasons for delaying the assessment of duty and release of the goods. Hence, to give quietus to the issue, the respondent is directed to assess the value of the goods as expeditiously as possible according to the prevailing rate. In the meantime, in the interest of justice, as an interim measure for releasing the consignment, the petitioner is directed to pay the actual duty according to the invoice value and further, pay the differential duty to the tune of 30% and for the remaining 70% of differential duty, the petitioner is directed to execute a bond. On such compliance, the goods detained shall be released forthwith. Other proceedings in the manner known to law be proceeded with. - Petition dispose of.

Summary

Issues:
1. Delay in the release of imported goods
2. Allegation of misdeclaration and misuse of IEC code
3. Discrepancy in declared value compared to contemporaneous import data

Analysis:

Issue 1: Delay in the release of imported goods
The petitioner imported 353 Cartons of Ribbons from China and declared the value at USD 1.10 per Kg. The goods were inspected, and it was found that the description and weight matched the invoice declaration. Despite this, the goods were not released promptly. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to release the goods provisionally on the declared value. The court directed the respondent to assess the value of the goods expeditiously and instructed the petitioner to pay the actual duty according to the invoice value, along with a 30% differential duty and execution of a bond for the remaining 70% differential duty for the goods to be released immediately.

Issue 2: Allegation of misdeclaration and misuse of IEC code
The respondent alleged that there was misuse of the IEC code and misdeclaration regarding brand names. The investigation was initiated due to discrepancies in the declaration of 'Superior' and 'Fantastic' brands. The respondent argued that the importer consistently declared a low value of USD 1.10 per Kg for the goods, which appeared to be undervalued compared to similar goods imported during the same period. The court considered these allegations but directed the release of goods upon compliance with the specified duty payments and bond execution.

Issue 3: Discrepancy in declared value compared to contemporaneous import data
The respondent contended that the declared value of the goods was significantly lower than the contemporaneous import data maintained in the National Import Database. The court acknowledged this argument but emphasized the need for expeditious assessment and release of goods. The court ordered the petitioner to pay the required duties and execute a bond to secure the release of the goods promptly.

In conclusion, the court addressed the delays in the release of imported goods, allegations of misdeclaration and misuse of IEC code, and the discrepancy in declared value compared to contemporaneous import data. The judgment balanced the interests of the petitioner and respondent by directing the assessment and release of goods upon compliance with specified duty payments and bond execution.