ALI SAIN DINO METLO, J.-The petitioners, after having been found to have mis declared the weight and value of synthetic organic pigment dyestuffs, imported by them from Japan, by all the fora unde* the Customs Act, 1969, have filed this Constitutional petition seeking the orders passed by the adjudicating, the appellate and the revisional authorities (respondents Nos. 2 to 4) to be declared as illegal, mala fide and of no legal consequence.
2. Briefly, the facts are that the petitioners imported three consignments of synthetic organic pigment dyestuffs from Japan in the years 1987 and 1988. Ln the bills of entry filed for the consignment imported vide IGM No-. 2613, dated 28.12.1987, Index No. 171, they declared the weight as 1500 kilograms and value of Rs. 459,702/- and in the bills of entry for the remaining two consignments imported vide IGM No. 222, dated 23.1.1988, Index No. 38 and IGM No. 422, dated 14.2.1988, Index No. 67, they declared the weight as 675 kilograms and 825 kilograms and value as Rs. 2,09,517/- and Rs. 2,46,263/- respectively. On examination, it was found that the weight was 250% under declared and, as a necessary consequence, the value was also found to have been grossly under declared and in this way huge amounts of duty and taxes were attempted to be evaded. The first consignment was adjudicated upon by the Collector of Customs (Appraisement), Custom House,- Karachi (respondent No. 1); while the remaining two, by the Deputy Collector of Customs (Appraisement-ll), Custom House, Karachi (respondent No. 2). Both the officers vide their Order-in-Original Nos. SI/MISC/06/88-Shed-16, dated 24.12.1988 and Sl/MISC/276/88-ll, dated 30.1.1989 found that the weight as well as the value of the goods had been grossly mis declared.
Accordingly, they confiscated the goods, with option of release only on payment of redemption fine, and also imposed personal penalties. The Collector imposed the fine of Rs. 3,50,000/- and equal amount as - personal penalty; while The Deputy Collector imposed the fine of Rs. 2,00,000/- and equivalent amount as personal penalty. The appeals filed against the Order-in-Original before the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 respectively were dismissed and the revision filed against the Order- in-Appeal of respondent No. 3 was also, dismissed by the respondent No. 4.
3. The contention of the petitioners that the synthetic organic pigment dyestuffs imported in the shape of cakes contained in big percentage of water which was excluded and the weight was declared on dry weight basis, did not find favour with all the above fora, lt was also found that per kilogram value, of the dyestuff cakes declared on their dry weight-basis, so worked out by the petitioner, was even less than that of the wet cakes. The petitioners could not rebut the evidence available with the department In that regard.
4. We are not convinced with the argument of Mr. Sattar Silat, learned counsel for the petitioners, that the petitioners had not made any deliberate misdeclaration as, according to him, they, while mentioning the net weight, had also mentioned the gross weight,- inasmuch as it was not clarified that the net weight mentioned in the bills of entry was worked out on dry-weight basis i.e. After excluding the percentage of water, lt was simply mentioned that the gross weight was with container and in this way a clear impression was given that the net weight was worked out by deducting only the weight of the container. Moreover, no plausible explanation could be offered for the gross under-valuation-. On the basis of unchallenged evidence produced before the departmental fora it was found that the value of the goods declared on their so-called dry-weight basis, worked out by the petitioners themselves without expressly mentioning so, was not even equal to the value in their wet condition, ln such circumstances, we do not find any justification for disturbing the concurrent factual findings of all the departmental fora based on sufficient material available on record, by exercising our Constitutional jurisdiction. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. These are the reasons for the short order announced on 17.2.2006.