Customs summons power in under-valuation inquiries can extend to parallel investigation despite pending valuation proceedings.

Section 108 of the Customs Act permits a gazetted customs officer to summon persons for evidence or documents in an inquiry connected with smuggling, and an under-valuation inquiry can fall within that scope because undervaluation may render goods liable to confiscation under section 111(m). The text explains that pending valuation proceedings under section 14 do not prevent a parallel customs inquiry, and a transfer of the matter for fuller investigation does not by itself show lack of jurisdiction or mala fides. It also notes that the importer's status or prior governmental approval for the goods does not exclude the customs power to investigate valuation and possible confiscation.

---

---

Issues: Whether summons issued under section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 for production of documents in an inquiry relating to alleged under-valuation was without jurisdiction or mala fide when valuation proceedings under section 14 were pending.

Analysis: Section 108 empowers a gazetted customs officer to summon persons whose attendance is considered necessary to give evidence or produce documents in an inquiry connected with smuggling. Smuggling, as defined in section 2(39), includes acts or omissions rendering goods liable to confiscation under section 111. The Court held that an inquiry into whether the declared value of imported goods was and whether additional value from related contracts had to be included was an inquiry connected with smuggling within the statutory definition, because undervaluation, if established, would attract section 111(m). The pendency of valuation adjudication under section 14 did not bar a parallel inquiry by customs authorities, nor did the transfer of the matter for a thorough inquiry show lack of jurisdiction or mala fides. The petitioners' status and the fact that the goods had been imported with governmental approval did not prevent customs from invoking the statutory power to investigate valuation and possible confiscation.

Conclusion: The summons under section 108 was valid and within jurisdiction, and the challenge failed.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition was dismissed, and the customs authorities were left free to proceed with a fresh summons in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: A customs officer may invoke section 108 where the inquiry concerns under-valuation that may render the goods liable to confiscation under section 111, because such an inquiry is one in connection with smuggling within section 2(39).

---