Bombay Department Store, et al. vs. The Commissioner of Customs

DECISION

On December 12, 19~, there arrived at the Port ot Manila an importation or 5 cases, consigned to petitioner Bombay Department Store and described in the bill of lading, commercial and consular invoices, and entry as parts or cycles. The Central Bank release certificate presented by petitioner also described the same as parts of cycles (730302-EP). However, upon examination by customs authorities, the importation was found to consist of 4 pes. Men•s Btcycles (complete), 4 pes. Men•s ~tcycles (complete), 1 pc. Boy 1s Tricycle (complete), 6 pes. Children's Bikes, 6 pes. Children 1s Bikes, 151 pes. Sheafter 1s pens, 20 bxs. handkerchiefs (cotton), 1 pc. Children's Sweater w/Shoes, 4o pes. Men's Sportswears (rayon), 42 pes. handbags, 36 pes. Men's Jackets (leather), 20 bxs. Cufflinks and buttons, 2-f bxs. Cufflinks and buttons, 6 bxs. CUfflinks, and 6 bxs. buttons. Hence, the importation was seized and later declared forfeited by the Collector or Customs tor the Port of Manila for violation or Central Bank Circulars Nos. 44 and 45 in relation to Section 1363(f) or the Revised Administrative Code.

In the interim, the importation was released to petitioner Bombay Department Store upon the filing of 77 -

..

2 - the First National Surety ·& Assurance Co., Inc. Bond No. 2021, dated August 4~ 1955, in the amount of P51779. 81, the conditions of which follow, to wit: "NOW, THEREFORE, the conditions of this obligation are such that in the event that it should be finally decided that the merchandise herein mentioned should be forfeited to the Government, and/or that a fine or surcharge should be 1mposed the entire amount of this bond, in case of ~orfeiture, or the corres- ponding amount of the fine or surcharge, as the case may be, shall be paid 1n CASH to the

Bureau of Customs•

PROVIDED, HOWEVER that if within thirty t30) days from demand for payment of the liability herein mentioned the said liability is not paid, and it should be found necessary to file an action in court to effect the collection thereof! a penalty of FIVE HUNDRED PESOS ( 500. 00) n addition shall be imposed otherwise, this obligation shall be void and of no effect. "

From the Collector's decision of forfeiture, peti- tioner appealed to respondent who affirmed the same on the ground of violation of Central Bank Circulars Nos. 44 and 45 and Section 1363(f), (i), (m)-3, (m)-4 and (~)-5 of the Revised Administrative Code. Being dis- satisfied with respondent's decision, petitioner filed ·the instant petition for review, to which respondent answered, praying that petitioner be ordered to pay him the sum of P5, 779.81, plus interest thereon and P5oo.oo as additional damages.

The Central Bank release certificate presented by petitioner to the customs authorities authorizes the re- lease of parts of cycles (730302- EP) . The statistical classification of commodities issued by the Central Bank as implemen~ing Central Bank Circulars Nos. 44 and 45 (revised on July 1, 1954) describes the commodities falling under Code No. 730302-EP as parts of bicycles

I

- 3 - and other cycles, not motorized (not including tires and electric parts). Obviously, the bicycles and tri- cycles, which are complete, do not fall under Commodity Code No. 730302-EP.

In consequence, they are not co- vered by the Central Bank release certificate presented by petitioner.

It cannot be questioned that the pens, handker- chiefs, sweater, sportswears, handbags, jackets, cuff- links and buttons in question are not parts of bicycles and of other cycles, not motorized.

They are likewise not covered by the Central Bank release certificate. Since the importation in question was not covered by the Central Bank release certificate presented by petitioner, it may be said that said importation was made without a release certificate. For this reason, it falls within the class of merchandise the import- ation of which was effected contrary to law and may be forfeited for violation of Central Bank Circular No. 44, in relation to Section 1363(f) of the Revised Adminis- trative Code (Pascual vs. Commissioner of Customs, G.R. No. L-10979, June 30, 1959).

Furthermore, the importation at bar is subject to forfeiture in pursuance of Section 1363 (m)-3 and ~ of the ReVised Administrative Code for the reason that the importation was effected upon the wrongfUl making of the commercial invoice by the exporter and of the entry by petitioner-importer.

Relative to respondent's claim for payment of addi- tional damages amounting to P5oo.oo, it may be stated that there is as yet no final judgment of forfeiture.

Consequently, there is as yet no liability on the part of petitioner for said damages (see Lazatin vs. Com- missioner, CTA Case No. 782, Jan. 19, 1962; QUe Hua Shirt Factory vs. Commissioner, CTA Cases Nos. 739 & 753, Jan. 11, 1962).

WHEREFORE, the decision appealed trom is hereby affirmed.

The petitioner Bombay Department Store is ordered to pay to the Commissioner or Customs or his authorized agent the amount of P5,779.81. With costs against petitioner.

WE CONCURa

ROMAN M. UMALI

Associate Judge

(