1992 (5) TMI 31

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rd in possession of the answering respondents herein would demonstrate that while importing the mini handy scanner and submitting the Bill of Entry therefore the petitioners herein failed to disclose all the relevant particulars relating to importation of the consignment, and also mis-declared the value thereof. Furthermore, import licence does not cover the restricted item like loaded P.C.B. and as such the Customs Authorities have initiated an investigation in the matter by obtaining the goods as mentioned in Annexure 'E' to the writ application. If the allegations are found to be correct on investigation the petitioner had no right to import the goods without a valid licence and the said goods are liable to confiscation. In such circums .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... utta. In my view this approach of the petitioner is entirely erroneous. Customs Officers at Calcutta and Bombay are officers of the same department. If any detention of goods has to be done at Bombay for the purpose of any investigation in Calcutta then I fail to see why the Customs Officers of Bombay cannot do so in exercise of their statutory authority under the Customs Act. 5. Moreover, serious allegations have been made that the petitioner has induced the Customs Officer to release the goods on false representation or suppression of facts. I do not see why remedial steps cannot be taken according to law. 6. Mr. Mullick appearing on behalf of the petitioner has contended that after the goods have been cleared it is not open to the Cust .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rt licence of the petitioner does not permit him to bring in the restricted items like loaded P.C.B., which was restricted under Appendix-2B of Serial No. 160 of the Import Export Policy of the 1990-93. Furthermore, it has been alleged that other costly software's were not disclosed at the time of importation. There is also allegation about distortion of the import price. 8. In view of the aforesaid the respondents have been able to make out a prima facie case which calls for an answer. Therefore, the writ petition fails and is dismissed. All the questions of facts and laws are left open to be agitated before the Adjudicating Authority. 9. Reply to the show cause notice must be sent to the authorities within 3 weeks time from date. The Ad .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X