Importer status under customs law depends on who handled clearance and filed the bill of entry, not on later seller claims.

The note explains that "importer" under the Customs Act is an inclusive concept covering the person treated as the importer during the period between importation and clearance for home consumption. Filing the bill of entry and handling clearance in another party's name does not, by itself, displace that party's importer status. It also states that a high seas seller or unpaid seller cannot claim importer status merely to challenge the adjudication, because locus standi depends on who was recognised as the importer in the customs proceedings.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant had locus standi to maintain the appeal as an importer within the meaning of Section 2(26) of the Customs Act.

Analysis: The definition of importer was treated as inclusive, covering any owner or person holding himself out to be the importer during the period between importation and clearance for home consumption. The fact that the bill of entry was filed and the goods were handled for clearance in the name of another party did not divest that party of importer status. A high seas seller or unpaid seller was not entitled to displace the person who had already been treated as the importer throughout the proceedings.

Conclusion: The appellant was held to have no locus standi and was not treated as the importer for purposes of the appeal.

Final Conclusion: The appeal was held to be not maintainable and was dismissed, along with the stay application.

Ratio Decidendi: A person who has filed the bill of entry and undertaken clearance remains the importer for purposes of customs proceedings, and an unpaid seller or high seas seller cannot claim importer status so as to challenge the adjudication.

---