Suhas Chandra Sen, J. - (1.) The petitioner imported mini handy scanner from Taiwan and submitted the Bill of Entry in respect thereof for clearance of the goods at Calcutta. The goods were released by Calcutta Customs to the petitioner's clearing agents. The petitioner claims that it had a valid licence to import the goods.
(2.) The case of the Customs Department as stated in the affidavit-in-opposition of Ranjan Kumar Sahoo, Respondent No. 3, affirmed on 4th October, 1991 is: "The evidence on record in possession of the answering respondents herein would demonstrate that while importing the mini handy scanner and submitting the Bill of Entry therefor 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 circumstances the petitioners herein are e-stopped to say that because of the order under Section 47 of the Customs Act steps cannot be taken against the petitioners under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962."
(3.) It has been further stated that all the questions will have to be adjudicated by the Competent Authority under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962.;