Jurisdiction for customs reassessment follows the assessing Custom House when import clearance was completed elsewhere and new evidence emerges.

Where imported goods had already been cleared under a Bill of Entry filed and assessed at Calcutta, the Customs authorities at Mumbai could not properly sustain further adjudication on valuation and the licit nature of the import on the basis of later search material. The Tribunal accepted that the completed assessment and verification at Calcutta made that Custom House the appropriate forum for any fresh probe arising from new evidence. The view that the matter had to be dealt with at Calcutta was held correct in law, and the Mumbai adjudication was not interfered with.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Customs authorities at Mumbai could sustain adjudication and interfere with the order releasing the seized goods when the goods had been cleared under a Bill of Entry filed and assessed at Calcutta, and whether further action on the basis of the fresh material had to be taken at the Calcutta Custom House.

Analysis: The goods were not in dispute as having been cleared under a proper Bill of Entry at Calcutta Custom House. Although the seizure took place in Bombay, the material before the Tribunal showed that the assessment and verification of the import had already been completed at Calcutta. The Tribunal held that further probe into valuation and the licit nature of the import, on the basis of the search material and other fresh evidence, ought to be undertaken by the Calcutta Custom House. The view taken by the Additional Commissioner that the matter had to be dealt with at Calcutta was found to be correct in law.

Conclusion: The Mumbai adjudication was not interfered with and the appeal failed.

---