Additional customs duty credit denied where declaration was undated, unproved, and inconsistent with the bill of entry.

Credit of additional customs duty could not be taken on the strength of the bill of entry because the appellant failed to establish a valid endorsement in its favour. The declaration relied on was undated, not shown to have been submitted to Customs, and was inconsistent with the bill of entry, which named Galaxy Paints Ltd. as importer. The claimed high-sea sale before entry into territorial waters was therefore not supported by the record, and mere payment of duty-related amounts by the appellant did not satisfy the legal requirement for availing credit. Denial of credit was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to take credit of the additional duty of customs on the strength of the bill of entry, and whether an alleged declaration could serve as endorsement in its favour.

Analysis: The declaration relied upon was undated, unsupported by proof of submission to Customs, and was inconsistent with the bill of entry. The bill of entry showed Galaxy Paints Ltd. as the importer, which contradicted the appellant's case that the goods had been sold on high-sea basis before entry into territorial waters. Payment of duty-related amounts by the appellant did not by itself satisfy the requirement of taking credit.

Conclusion: The appellant was not entitled to credit, and the challenge to the order confirming denial of credit failed.

---