Incorrect quoting of PCT is not tantamount to misdeclaration; ONO struck down

KARACHI: The Collector of Customs Appeals has struck down the order-in-original in favor of M/s AH International, importer of automobile safety glass, observing that incorrect quoting of PCT is not tantamount to misdeclaration.
According to the details of the case, M/s AH International imported a consignment and sought clearance declaring the goods to be automobile safety glass weighing 9150KG under H.S Code 7007.1190.
Upon examination, it was found that imported had misdeclared in terms of weight and PCT of the goods. The weight of the consignment was found 11910 KG as against the declared weight of 9150KG while the PCT was also declared as 7007.1190 attracting customs duty at 25 percent instead of correct PCT as 7007.1119 attracting customs duty at 35 percent.
The adjudicating officer observed that the imported had deliberately concealed the weight of goods and mis-declared in terms of weight and PCT in order to get the assessment on suppressed weight of goods and to evade legitimate amount of customs duty and other taxes to the tune of Rs627,623 willfully and with malafide intention.
The adjudication officer imposed a redemption fine of 20 percent of the value of the goods and imposed a penalty of Rs10,000.
Aggrieved, the imported approached Collector of Customs Appeals submitting that the allegation of citing an incorrect PCT heading as 7007.1190 instead of 7007.1119 is based on perception since declared description fully corroborate the examination report.
The number of pieces has also been found to be correct. The imported submitted that allegations are unwarranted under the circumstances of the case adding that a correct GD was filed with correct description of goods, which is undisputed.
It is observed that the total weight was declared correctly and net weight was declared as per supplier’s documents, therefore there was no willful misdeclaration of weight.
Collector Appeals observed that importer’s contention that both headings refer to others’ and it was innocent mistake seems plausible and ordered remitting of fine and penalty.

Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.