|
|
|
Insertion of new section 135AA in Customs Act, 1962 - Was it a necessity or response to inaction under existing legislations?
|
|
|
|
Top Stories |
|
|
|
|
Somesh Arora | 08 Feb, 2022
The recent budget through Finance Bill has sought introduction of
Section 135AA as a part of the Customs Act, 1962 the same is reproduced
below:
Clause 94. After section 135A of the Customs Act, the following section shall be inserted, namely:
Protection of data.
Section 135AA.
(1)
If a person publishes any information relating to the value or
classification or quantity of goods entered for export from India, or
import into India, or the details of the exporter or importer of such
goods under this Act, unless required so to do under any law for the
time being in force, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term
which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to fifty
thousand rupees, or with both.
(2) Nothing contained in this section shall apply to any publication made by or on behalf of the Central Government.
Explanation.
-- For the purposes of this section, the expression "publishes"
includes reproducing the information in printed or electronic form and
making it available for the public'.
Clause 94 of Finance Bill,
2022 thus seeks to insert new section 135AA in the Customs Act, so as to
make punishable the publishing of information relating to the value or
classification or quantity of goods entered for export from India, or
import into India, or the details of the exporter or importer of such
goods, unless required so to do under any law for the time being in
force except that provision shall not apply to any publication made by
or on behalf of the Central Government.
The stated object of
introduction of Section 135AA is to protect the import and export data
submitted to Customs by importers or exporters in their declaration by
making publishing of such information, unless provided by the law, as an
offence under Customs Act. An exception has been carved out as far as
any publication is made by or on behalf of the Central Government.
Therefore,
the data published by Ministry of Commerce which normally forms basis
of Anti-Dumping duty and Safeguard proceedings and is presented in
aggregate without naming the importers and exporters, continues to
remain unaffected.
The purpose of the provision is to prevent
details of imports and exports as may be captured by the IT System of
Customs Department or by NIDB data from being leaked out.
It is
stated that proposal will only criminalise the illicit publication of
transactional data by private entities, especially where the data
reveals the identity of exporter or importer.
The provision
seeks to empower the Customs to combat bad actors and hackers who
illicitly mine commercially identifying and sensitive information and
are engaged in selling transactional information or the dark web or
through websites.
A number of entities (websites) have been
identified by the CBIC who are selling data containing the name of
exporter/importer, description of goods, quantity, value, classification
etc. By selling commercially sensitive information, including the names
of importers and exporters, they adversely impact the competitive
position of Indian exporters in the international trade.
Earlier,
in 2016, the Government had taken the step of protecting data of Indian
exporters and importers, after rescinding provisions for publication of
daily lists of transactions. The details are as follows -
"Publication
of Daily Lists of Imports & Exports Rules, 2004" was rescinded
under notification 140/2016 - Customs (NT) dated 25th November 2016, at
the behest of Ministry of Commerce, which was prompted by industry
complaints regarding leakage of commercially identifying and
confidential information of import/export transactions.
As is
mentioned, a need for such a measure to Customs Department arose as
various data of importer or exporter was getting published on Internet
and was after hacking etc., being illegally commercially exploited. It
is also a fact that same was used by various persons either to offer
defense in matters relating to valuation or classification.
But,
instead of taking actions against such hackers under existing laws
wherein a much severe punishments are available (as under the
Information Technology Act as also under the Copyright Act which
includes data base in its purview and both of which are again in turn
covered under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002), the Department
has chosen to answer its own inaction against such hackers through
creation of another provision providing far less punishment through an
offense which has been made bailable and non-cognizable and prescribes
punishment of only six month or fine up to Rs 50,000, or both.
On
the other hand, publishing of such information from the database will
prevent a lot of assessees in offering effective defense against
differential classification or valuation being accepted by the
Department at various ports, unless the department decides to make such
vital information available without names and addresses of importer and
exporters.
This may either encourage litigation or inconsistent
assessment at various ports and therefore, varied assessment procedures
in practice. The flipside is that vital information which may require
business secrecy of importers and exporters may be maintained but only
to some extent as foreign based hackers will still do their job.
While
carving out such provision department has chosen the recourse of more
power to itself, which rather shows that department has not chosen the
Information Technology enforcement authorities or copyright authorities
or Enforcement Directorate working under the same Ministry.
The
right of any litigant to contest and defend itself against any Show
Cause Notice, which indicates discriminatory practices should not be
ignored neither the adequacy of other more effective existing
legislations, the use of which department never seems to have made.
Since
a litigant has a right to seek any information in possession of the
Department for the purpose of his defense, will the department provide
information without disclosing names of importers and exporters, about
the classification of any product as assessed by the Department at
various ports or the valuation thereof for contemporaneous imports and
exports, if demanded under Right to Information Act, 2005 or for purpose
of defense, remains to be answered. The wheat therefore must be
separated from chaff.
It will be a pragmatic approach to legally
allow publishing of such information sans name and addresses, and the
same can be done by the Customs Department or Central Government only on
commercial basis.
The format can be such as can be accepted by the courts and the Adjudicating Authority for their evidentiary value.
If
the department is really serious about enforcing such provision, it
should publish the classification of various products at various ports
or the price range at which the same gets cleared in any particular
month and treat the same as permissible evidence for defense purposes
with statutory authority of law.
And further, it is time that
the government decides to provide IPR protection to business secrets,
which it has not done so far under Indian dispensation, rather than
allowing such piecemeal efforts under various legislations for
protection of data.
[Somesh Arora is an Advocate (Amicus Rarus), and Former Commissioner of Customs & Excise]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customs Exchange Rates |
Currency |
Import |
Export |
US Dollar
|
84.35
|
82.60 |
UK Pound
|
106.35
|
102.90 |
Euro
|
92.50
|
89.35 |
Japanese
Yen |
55.05 |
53.40 |
As on 12 Oct, 2024 |
|
|
Daily Poll |
|
|
Will the new MSME credit assessment model simplify financing? |
|
|
|
|
|
Commented Stories |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|