Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 32,79,80,81(2),81(4),81(5),179(3),194A(1 ),207,208,209

(a) Customs Act (IV of 1969)--- ----Ss. 32 & 80---Import of goods---S.R.O. No.371(I)/2002 dated 15-6-2002---Checking of goods declaration---False statement and mis-declaration---Scope---Charge of mis-declaration had been levelled on the importer on basis of specifications given in MTC, which according to department were not as shown therein instead and they could not determine the same through naked eye and a test was desired---Under regime of "One Customs", no duty and taxes were paid in advance, in fact under S.R.O. No. 371(I)/2002 dated 15-06-2002---Under S. 80 of Customs Act, 1969, it was duty of customs officers to determine the exact description, specification, quantity, weight and PCT Heading as the same fell within the ambit of "assessment"---Department was also empowered under S. 80 of Customs Act, 1969 to either accept or reject the claim of exemption and complete the assessment as ascertained by it under respective PCT heading, mentioning or claiming ascertained PCT, under which importer's goods did not fall or could not be construed an act of mis-declaration on the part of importer---During the process of assessment, it was the duty of Assessing Officer not only to examine the goods but also to tally the description, its weight and value of goods thereof and to consider any extra information available on the Bill of Entry in order to arrive at a correct assessment of duty and taxes---To constitute a criminal act an element of mens rea and intentional knowledge was necessary and the offending act must be one in which material particulars had been wrongly given or provided to Customs Authorities---In the present case, in goods declaration all the entries relating to description, quantity and nature of goods were found true and no charge had been framed against importer on such count---Alleging a charge of mis-declaration in such circumstances, particularly on the basis of wrong classification heading did not constitute an offence within the framework of S. 32 of Customs Act, 1969 as there was no material falsity in the statement made by importer---Appeals were allowed, accordingly. 2003 PTD (Trib.) 293; Umme Kulsoom Trading Co. v. Collector of…