TIOL-DDT 370 · the untouched capture
Rendered as it looked. Links and images are disabled in this view; the file itself is untouched.
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<link rel=Edit-Time-Data href="./DDT%20370_files/editdata.mso">
<title>Taxindiaonline's DDT 363</title>
</head>
<body>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><font color="#663399" size="3">TIOL-DDT
370</font><br>
25 05 2006<br>
Wednesday </b></font></p>
<p align=center ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><font color="#006600">Authorised
smuggling stopped - Vizag and Mumbai are at last ports authorized to handle
imports and exports.</font></b></font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">TIOL’s
relentless battle to stop the smuggling that was going on through the ports
of Vizag, Mumbai, Kakinada has at last resulted in the Board notifying these
ports. Let us see the issue through earlier editions of DDT.</font></p>
<p ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=1329">DDT
73 - 14-03-2005</a><b> </b>asked, <b><font color="#006600">Hazira appointed
a Customs port – What about Vizag? </font></b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">As
per section 7 of the Customs Act, the Board can appoint customs ports which
alone shall be the Customs ports for imports and exports. By Notification No.
62/94-CUSTOMS (N.T.), dated the 21st November, 1994, several ports have been
appointed. Now Hazira(<st1:place w:st="on">Surat) is added to the list. But
this notification No. 62/94 has been giving me the jitters for the past decade.
Sl. No. 2 of the table to the Notification is as follows:-</font></p>
<p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>TABLE</b></font></p>
<table width="450" border=1 align="center" cellpadding=5 cellspacing=0>
<tr>
<td width=56 valign=top > <p align=center ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>S.
No.</strong></font></p></td>
<td width=112 valign=top > <p align=center ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>STATE/UNION
TERRITORY</strong></font></p></td>
<td width=168 valign=top > <p align=center ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>PORT</strong></font></p></td>
<td width=228 valign=top > <p align=center ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>PURPOSE</strong></font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width=56 valign=top > <p align=center ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(1)</font></p></td>
<td width=112 valign=top > <p align=center ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(2)</font></p></td>
<td width=168 valign=top > <p align=center ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(3)</font></p></td>
<td width=228 valign=top > <p align=center ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(4)</font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width=56 rowspan=4 valign=top > <p align="center"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">2.</font></p></td>
<td width=112 rowspan=4 valign=top > <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Andhra
Pradesh</font></p></td>
<td width=168 valign=top > <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>(1)
Kakinada</b></font></p></td>
<td width=228 valign=top > <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Unloading
of Petroleum Products and Loading of export goods or any class of such
goods.</b></font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width=168 valign=top > <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(2)
Krishnapatnam</font></p></td>
<td width=228 valign=top > <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Unloading
of imported goods and loading of export goods or any class of such goods.</font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width=168 valign=top > <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">(3)
Masulipatnam</font></p></td>
<td width=228 valign=top > <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Loading
of export goods or any class of such goods.</font></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width=168 valign=top > <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>(4)
Vishakapatnam</b></font></p></td>
<td width=228 valign=top > <p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Loading
of export goods or any class of such goods.</b></font></p></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So
the two very important ports in Andhra Pradesh, Visakhapatnam and Kakinada are
not really full-fledged ports. </font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Kakinada
is only for loading of export goods and <b>unloading</b> of only Petroleum products.
And the largest operating port in <st1:country-region w:st="on">India</st1:country-region>,
Visakhapatnam, as per this notification is only for export. That is ‘no import’
from either port, except of course Petroleum products in Kakinada. The notification
specifies several ports like Kandla, Mangalore, <st1:State w:st="on">Cochin,
Nhava Seva, Paradeep, <st1:place w:st="on">Madras. And all these ports are for
the purposes of <i>“Unloading of imported goods and loading of export goods
or any class of such goods.” </i> Why then the difference for Visakhapatnam
and Kakinada? Beats me! Of course there is another Notification which is not
yet rescinded - Notification No. 77 – cus dated 19.5.1973, which also appoints
Visakhapatnam and Kakinada as ports but only <b>for the shipment and loading
of goods. </b></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So,
as per the law, imported goods cannot be unloaded at Visakhapatnam and imported
goods other than Petroleum products cannot be unloaded at Kakinada. But I have
personal knowledge that imported goods are being unloaded at both these ports
for any number of years. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">It
is a genuine doubt that I have been carrying for the last decade or so as to
why these ports are not declared as ports for unloading imported goods and how
they have functioned as import ports all these years. In the beginning, I was
afraid to ask; May be I would be considered a stupid fool to ask such elementary
questions. Slowly I took courage and started asking people. My colleagues in
Central Excise were of no help. I asked friends in Customs. They were more helpless.
“It should be somewhere, search and thou shalt find”, said many. I searched
and found – nothing. Can somebody help in solving this mystery? </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DDT
99 - 21 04 2005 - <font color="#006600">Appointment of ports – Muldwarka.
What about Vizag?</font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So,
as per the law, imported goods cannot be unloaded at Visakhapatnam and imported
goods other than Petroleum products cannot be unloaded at Kakinada. But I have
personal knowledge that imported goods are being unloaded at both these ports
for any number of years. There are a lot of illegal imports going on in Vizag
and Kakinada as they are not really recognised ports and this is going on for
ages!</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DDT
171 - 03 08 2005 </strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">DDT
has pointed out several times that in the notification, Vizag is notified as
a port only for loading of export goods but NOT for import of goods, but the
Vizag Customs earns nearly a thousand Crores from Revenue on import of goods,
which is totally illegal as per the notification. We hope one day the Government
will rectify this defect.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DDT
217 - 06 10 2005 - </strong><font color="#006600"><strong>Smuggling in Visakhapatnam
goes unchecked with the approval of the Government for more than a decade </strong></font></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">But
in the callous way that notifications are prepared, a very important lapse has
gone undetected and in spite of DDT mentioning it several times, Board has not
bothered to rectify the lapse. As per Sl. No 2(4) of Notification No. 62/94-Cus
NT, Visakhapatnam is a port for Loading of export goods. Imports through Vizag
port are illegal, as Vizag is not declared as a port for import. There is a
Chief Commissioner sitting in Vizag assisted by a Commissioner in collecting
Crores of Revenue on import duty when import itself through the port is illegal.
Whenever the goods are unloaded from a vessel in Vizag port, the goods should
be seized as Vizag is not a port for unloading of imported goods. As per Section
111(a) of the Customs Act, any goods imported by sea or air which are unloaded
or attempted to be unloaded at any place other than a customs port or customs
airport appointed under clause (a) of section 7 for the unloading of such good
are liable for confiscation. As mentioned earlier Vizag is a port only for loading
of export goods and not for unloading of imported goods. And so all the goods
unloaded at Vizag port are liable for confiscation.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">As
per Section 2(39) of the Customs Act “smuggling”, is defined as
any act or omission which will render (such) goods liable to confiscation under
section 111 or section 113; </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So
the goods unloaded at Vizag port are smuggled goods and there is a whole Custom
House there abetting this smuggling, which is going unabated for more than a
decade. As per Section 112, any person who abets any act which makes the goods
liable for confiscation is also liable to a penalty. So every officer of Vizag
Customs who allows clearance of this illegally unloaded cargo in Vizag is liable
for this penalty! </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DDT
220 - 13 10 2005 -</strong><font color="#006600"><strong> Customs ports appointed
– What happens in Vizag?</strong></font></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Nagpur,
Maharashtra; Vadinar, Gujarat appointed as Customs ports/airports. Port after
port is being notified but nothing happens about Vizag which we had pointed
out was not a port for import, but still imports take place there illegally.
Even the Board’s detailed essay on Right To Information Act mentions about
Unscrupulous parties do attempt to evade the duties leviable and bypass various
prohibitions/restrictions in relation to imports by attempting to bring the
goods into the country from places other than the notified ports/airports/Land
Custom Stations. DDT’s report that Vizag is not a port authorised for
import had indeed evoked some angry responses, but no attempt seems to be made
to correct the lapse.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DDT
259 - 12 12 2005</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
Pune has been an airport only for unloading of certain goods now it is made
an airport for unloading of all imported goods and loading of export goods.
Will Vizag Customs do something like this?</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DDT
286 - 19 01 2006 </strong>- <font color="#006600"><strong>Crew baggage can be
loaded and unloaded at Panaji but what about other places?</strong></font></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">And
there is the classic example of Vizag and Kakinada which, we are not tired of
pointing out, are illegal ports all because the Board does not bother to issue
proper notifications!</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DDT
303 - 15 02 2006</strong> - <font color="#006600"><strong>Customs ports - Trombay</strong></font></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Trombay
is declared as a port for unloading of coal. Should we again remind about Vizag?</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DDT
306 - 20 02 2006</strong> - <font color="#006600"><strong>Smuggling is not the
dishum dishum of Mumbai films; it can simply be imports through Vizag port.</strong>
</font></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>DDT
307 21 02 2006</strong> -<strong> <font color="#006600">Rampant Smuggling in
Mumbai too, not in Vizag alone</font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">DDT
had mentioned on several occasions that import through a port other than a port
notified is an offence and falls within the definition of smuggling under the
Customs Act. As Vizag has not been notified as a port for import all imports
through Vizag amount to smuggling. Many officers of Vizag Customs are not exactly
happy with DDT for highlighting the fact that every import through Vizag is
smuggling. A very senior officer told us that this is sensational reporting,
but why can’t they get a notification issued? DDT’s comments yesterday
drew sharp comments from another officer of Vizag Customs. “Why can’t
you write about the smuggling in Mumbai port?”, he asks us in apparent
anguish, “by your logic, there is more smuggling in Mumbai – for
Mumbai port is also not declared as a port under the Act”. Yes Sir, you
are right. All imports in Mumbai also fall under the category of smuggling.
Strangely the Board has no time for elementary basic concepts. Actually this
is where it all started. My Bangalore lawyer friend told me, “There is
lot of smuggling in Mumbai!”</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Board
has finally woken up and </b>a notification is now issued to not only appoint
Vizag and <st1:place w:st="on">Kakinada for imports but also to add several
ports. <b>Is the problem solved?</b> For the future, YES, but what about the
past? Commissioners were very angry with us and accused us of sensationalised
reporting when we said imports through these ports were illegal and not only
the goods were liable for confiscation but officers abetting the smuggling were
liable for penal action. Senior officers could not believe that such a major
flaw could go on for years. Another officer asked us to look in the Old Sea
Customs Act for a notification, as these ports are very old! But the Board’s
amendment to the notifications proves us right. The fact that these ports were
notified now proves that they were not till yesterday. Any way we are grateful
that at least now reason has dawned on the powers that be to set right an error
glaringly mocking at the law for the last 12 years. In fact we called up one
of the Commissioners to congratulate him on finally being able to preside over
a legal port!</font></p>
<p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><u><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=24&filename=notification/custom/2006/cnt06_052.htm">NOTIFICATION
NO. 52/2006 (N.T.)-Cus., Dated: May 23, 2006 </a></u></font></p>
<p align=center ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><font color="#006600">Beware!
Draconian laws are on their way – <a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=wnew/taxation_laws_amend_bill_2006.htm">Taxation
Laws (Amendment) Bill</a> passed by Parliament</font></b></font></p>
<p align="justify" ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">With
the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Bill having been passed by both Houses of Parliament,
it is only a matter of a few days before they become Law and what a Law? Officers
can attach your property immediately after issuing a Show Cause Notice. Penalty
for misdeclaration can be five times the value. Many in the Revenue departments
have a feeling that they do not have enough powers; now they are given enough
and more powers to misuse. TIOL had the honour of appearing before the Parliamentary
Standing Committee that studied this Bill. </font></p>
<p align=center ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><font color="#006600">THE
<a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=wnew/cess_repeal_amend_bill_06.htm">CESS
LAWS (REPEALING AND AMENDING) BILL</a> also cleared by Parliament.</font></b></font></p>
<p ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">DDT had covered
this extensively in <u><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=2454">TIOL-DDT
187 25 08 2005</a></u></font></p>
<P align=center><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><B><IMG height=62 src="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/image/ddt/gnl_txt2.jpg" width=375></B></font></P>
<table width="375" border="1" align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tr>
<td><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=3 width=375 border=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD width="67"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><IMG height=67 src="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/image/ddt/gnl_word.jpg" width=67 align=absMiddle></font></TD>
<TD><p><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b><i><font color="#0000FF">nemo
judex in re sua </font></i></b><font color="#0000FF"><b><i> </i></b></font><b><i>-
</i> a man should not be a judge in his own cause.Right against
bias</b> </font></p></TD>
</TR>
</TBODY>
</TABLE></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Two fundamental
maxims of natural justice are </font></p>
<p ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> (i) audi alteram
partem and</font></p>
<p ><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> (ii) nemo judex
in re sua. </font></p>
<p ><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Until
Tomorrow with more DDT </font></p>
<p><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have
a nice day. </font></p>
<p><font color="#FF6666" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Mail
your comments to </font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="mailto:vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com"><b>vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com</b></a></font></p>
</body>
</html>