Sources say that Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) chairman DS Solanki and member (customs) Sukumar Shankar are likely to intervene in the war of words between the two wings.

The issue flared up when the Mumbai customs commissioner (exports) shot off a letter to the Delhi commissioner, customs (inland container depot), which virtually amounted to one customs house dictating terms to another, something unprecedented in the department, official sources said.

The Delhi customs wing smelt a rat of a major cartel operation going on in Mumbai for marble import when they received a representation from a body titled, `Marble Exporters/Importers Association of India, Mumbai' seeking an end to marble imports through inland container depots. On verification with the association's president Vivek Talwar, it was found that the letter had been fabricated and that the association hadnever made such a representation.

Within two months of the false representation, the Mumbai commissioner wrote a letter to the Delhi commissioner (ICD) stating that no transhipment would be permitted from the Mumbai customs house if a `no-objection' is not obtained from the DEEC section. He also mentioned that in case the party which imports does not have DEEC licence, it should be ensured that quantum of redemption fine and personal penalty is such that the imported is deterred from importing again.

The letter also stated that a no objection would be issued subject to detailed assessment procedure which is prevailing in the Mumbai customs house.

In a strong rebuttal to the Mumbai commissioner's letter last week, the Delhi commissioner (ICD) replied that withholding transhipment permission would not be legally sustainable and would unnecessarily cause further delays.

The Delhi commissioner stated in the letter that as far as adhering to the procedure followed by Mumbai customs house was concerned, itwas "totally unprecedented where one custom house proposes to impose its own assessment practice on another custom house".

He also asked the Mumbai customs to pass on all information relating to value of marble blocks being imported which should be supported by documentary evidence. He pointed out that the Mumbai commissionerate had not given any documentary evidence despite repeated reminders.

On the fine and personal penalty, the Delhi commissioner stated that the practice of neutralising the profit margin was being adopted and while doing so, the detention and demurrage charges incurred by the importer are also taken into consideration as they add up to the cost of imports.

Sources in the Delhi commissionerate said that fines and penalties were being imposed to the tune of 150 per cent to 200 per cent of the invoice import price. The other custom houses all over the country, including Mumbai, was imposing the fines more or less in the same range, they said.