COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS Vs. UNIK TRADERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Department of Customs has filed the above appeal against the order dtd. 10/12/2018 passed in W.P(MD)No.7591 of 2015.

(2.) The respondent/writ petitioner had imported 'Star Aniseeds' through Tuticorin Port. The said Star Aniseeds were undervalued by the respondent for evasion of duty. The investigation revealed that the respondent/writ petitioner imported 'Star Aniseeds' vide 59 bills of entry from April 2009 by declaring the value as Rs.62.86 and Rs.70.88 per Kg. The imports were from Vietnam, China and Singapore. It is further investigated that the other importers had imported the same 'Star Aniseeds' and declared the value at Rs.138.00 per kg. Therefore, it was reported that the import comprise of 'Star Aniseeds' should be above Rs.130.00 per kg. However, the respondent had imported through Tuticorin Port by undervaluing the same, by declaring the value between Rs.62.86 and Rs.70.88 per kg., from 2009. The respondent had admitted the above facts in respect of the container number, bills of lading number, marking of packages and the cargo and the quantity. The further investigation revealed that the respondent had with an intention to evade payment of customs duty, replaced the actual invoice issued by the original supplier.

(3.) The appellant also had found that the undervaluation made by the respondent/writ petitioner was supported by documents. It was found by the appellant that the respondent had substituted the actual invoice issued by the original supplier at overseas by changing only the supplier's name and the value with an intention to evade appropriate payment of customs duty. The documents received from the Customs Overseas Intelligence Network also revealed that the respondent had suppressed the actual value of the cargo. So having found that the respondent had in violation to the provisions of Sec. 46(4) of the Customs Act, 1962, with an intention to evade payment of higher customs duty by declaring low value, issued a show-cause notice under Sec. 28 of the Act. Thereafter, following the due process of law, the adjudicating authority also passed the order in original on 16/1/2015.