Misdeclaration in import shipments and unauthorised synthetic waste import justified confiscation and penalty despite no Bill of Entry.

Import of synthetic fibre waste without the requisite licence was held liable to confiscation because examination and chemical testing showed the consignment was not wool waste as declared. The importer's plea of a shipment mix-up failed where it had already retired the documents after payment, sought amendment of the import manifest, and did not promptly alert Customs. The absence of a Bill of Entry did not negate misdeclaration or the importer's knowledge of the goods, and the penalty was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the import of synthetic waste without the requisite licence was liable to confiscation and whether penalty was sustainable notwithstanding the plea of mix-up in the shipment and absence of a Bill of Entry.

Analysis: The imported consignment was found, on examination and chemical test, to consist largely of synthetic fibre waste and not wool waste as declared. The importer had retired the documents after payment, sought amendment of the IGM, and did not promptly inform Customs of the alleged mix-up. The record also showed that import of synthetic waste required a specific licence and the goods were brought in without such authorisation. The absence of a Bill of Entry did not displace the evidence showing that the importer had knowledge of the consignment and attempted to clear it in the existing form.

Conclusion: The import was correctly held liable to confiscation and the penalty was rightly sustained; the contention that no misdeclaration could arise merely because no Bill of Entry was filed was rejected.

---