Mandatory electronic payment of duty:
The Central Government has notified the following classes of importers who have to pay customs duty electronically, namely: –
(i) Importers registered under Accredited Clients Programme
(ii) Importers paying customs duty of ` 1 lakh or more per bill of entry
The importer desirous to make use of the e-payment facility first needs to have an internet account with a designated bank. The Board has set up a dedicated payment gateway called, ‘ICEGATE’.
If the importer is registered on this Web site, it can easily use the e-payment facility with the current log-in facility. Those that are un-registered can also use the Web site as an ‘unregistered user’.
The importer need not produce any proof of payment for the clearance of goods in case of epayment.
Relevant Cases
1. Can the goods be confiscated after the order under section 47?
It has been held in Madanlal Steel Industries (P) Ltd V. UOI 1991 56 ELT 705 (Mad) that the order of clearance undr section 47 is not required to be set aside to effect seizue & commence confiscation proceedings. The above decision has been followed in the case of Titanide Coating Pvt. Ltd v. Assistant Collector of Customs. 1993 (67) ELT 260 (Kar) which held that the proceedings under section 28, 110, & 124 are not subject to the order under section 47 of the Act.
2. In case of detention of goods by the Department, who is to pay the demurrage charges?
In case there is detention of goods by Customs authorities for whatever reason, and goods so detained are given to the custody of approved custodian during the pendency of adjudication of rival claims between the department and the importer, the importer is entitled to be furnished with a detention certificate or an order detaining the goods indicating reasons which is to serve as the evidence of detention and as a receipt of the goods by the department. Upon the settlement of dispute, if the department succeeds in establishing that detention is justified, the importer has to bear the burden of demurrage, and if the department fails the department has to bear the same [Tirupathi Plastics v. Assistant Collector of Customs 1990 (49) ELT 49 (Kar)].