20-year legal battle ends in favour of senior Customs officers

• Customs investigations revealed discrepancies in the description and classification of the goods
• The petitioners maintained that the decision made by the DGC dated October 8, 2004, is illegal and arbitrary
• After considering submissions made by the parties, the Supreme Court decided that there is no merit in this case and no question of law to be tried; hence, leave was refused

By Lakmal Sooriyagoda   

A 20-year legal battle initiated by four senior customs officers in 2004, challenging the decision of the then Director General of Customs (DGC) to release a consignment of goods containing five containers to an export company, recently ended in favour of the four senior customs officers after the Supreme Court refused to grant special leave to appeal an application filed by the export company.    

In this case, four senior Customs officers including the OIC of the Sri Lanka Customs Investigation Bureau had filed a writ application in the Court of Appeal challenging the decision of DGC to release a consignment of five containers to an export company named Lanka Cables and Conductors (Pvt) Ltd. The petitioners maintained that the decision made by the DGC dated October 8, 2004, is illegal and arbitrary. As the customs investigations into these five containers revealed that the description and the classifications of the contents were false and misleading, a customs inquiry was conducted by the Deputy Director of Customs. Deputy Director of Customs ordered the release of the same on recovery of a mitigated forfeiture of Rs.6 million to the exporter for exportation. Further imposed a penalty of Rs.100,000 on Lanka Cables and Conductors (Pvt) Ltd. 

 
In its judgement, the Court of Appeal held that the Director General of Customs (DGC) acted beyond his powers in making the order to release the goods. Aggrieved by this decision, the export company filed for special leave to appeal in the Supreme Court.   

During the argument Senior Counsel K. Deekiriwewa appearing for the export company argued that under Section 2 of the Customs Ordinance, the DGC has the power to set aside the order made by the Inquiring Officer at a Customs inquiry. He argued that the Court of Appeal did not correctly evaluate the scope of Section 2, and thus the Court of Appeal judgement is wrong and erroneous.   

President’s Counsel A.A.M. Illiyas with Senior Counsel Ian Fernando appearing for the customs officer pointed out that the export company had pleaded guilty at the Customs inquiry without going through the proper process. Subsequently, the company obtained an order from the DGC to set aside the order made by the Inquiring Officer. He further said that once the Inquiring Officer used Section 163 of the Customs Ordinance to mitigate the imposed penalty as the representative of the DDC, the Director General could not invoke the powers under Section 163 again.   

After considering submissions made by the parties, the Supreme Court decided that there is no merit in this case and no question of law to be tried; hence, leave was refused.   

A.A.M. Illiyas, PC with Senior Counsel Ian Fernando and Tharindu Rathnayaka instructed by Dereck Fernando appeared for the customs officers. K. Deekiriwewa appeared for the export company. Deputy Solicitor General Suranga Wimalasena appeared for the Attorney General.