The state alleges that in March 2014, Indurjeeth, who worked for Estina, issued and signed a customs clearing instruction on behalf of the company to clearing agent UTi South Africa (Pty) Ltd.
According to the state, the company is duly registered in accordance with South African law and represented by Vasram, who was the sole director and shareholder.
The state alleges that Vasram and Indurjeeth were acquainted and associated, acting on their own volition or in collusion, during the commission of the offences. The two individually and jointly acted as an importer, the state said.
According to the state, Vasram registered Estina with the SA Revenue Service customs division as an import and export business and a Sars client.
On Monday, Swart told the court that the accused acting on behalf of Estina issued a written instruction (clearing instruction), to a clearing agent, UTi South Africa (Pty) Ltd (now DSV South Africa (Pty) Ltd). He explained to the court that UTi South Africa is a licensed clearing agent in terms of section 64B of the CEO Act.
The state also alleges that the goods imported were falsely declared as new and valued at $3,448,800 (R37,718,634).
Swart told the court that upon realising that the goods were not new, the importer should have approached the clearing agent and applied for a proper permit.
Having also approached the Reserve Bank, Swart told the court that he had tried to find an expert in the milk producers' organisation who could conduct a full valuation of the imported goods.
Swart said an investigating officer in the original Estina investigation in the Free State indicated to him that he had photos of the equipment that had been imported.
He told the court that he went to obtain a statement from the person who took the photographs. A request was also made to the Indian customs authority.
“Sars has a formal treaty between SA customs and Indian customs. In terms of the treaty, a request was forwarded through the customs side of Sars to the Indian customs to inquire what the value of the goods was when it was transported from India — to inquire what the total value of the shipment was, against what we had in S A,” he said.
He said the correspondence from the counsel general of India's office in Dubai included information about the importation, including screen prints of the customs declaration of each of the nine containers.
When the state wrapped up its examination in chief, the prosecution said he found it “rather quick and unexpected”.
The state questioned Swart in detail as to his involvement in the case. “Your involvement in this case only commenced a few years after the relevant acts were already committee.”
Swart indicated that the matter was assigned to him about six years after the importation.
The state also questioned Swart on the official process of importation and asked if the documents he testified on were before Sars before his investigations.
Without giving a clear answer, Swart indicated that though the documents were submitted through the electronic data information (EDI) system, they were received by an automated system.
He had testified that the customs clearance documents including the declaration were submitted through the Sars EDI system by the clearing agent.
TimesLIVE
Sars investigator tells Estina trial of million-dollar transactions
Image: Supplied / NPA ID
The state's first witness in the R37.7m fraud case involving two alleged Gupta associates testified that during his investigations he noticed that Estina had made payments through an authorised dealer with a shortfall of $100,000.
A pasteurisation plant, imported from India, was invoiced to Estina by Gateway, an alleged Gupta front company in the United Arab Emirates.
Kamal Vasram and Saliesh Indurjeeth, who are on trial in connection with the matter, have pleaded not guilty to all charges.
The charges are fraud, contravention of section 54(1)(A) of the International Trade Administration Act and contravention of regulation 22 of the Exchange Control Act. They arise from a joint investigation by the SA Revenue Service and the ID into the failed Free State Estina project.
Sars investigator Piet Swart told the court he had established that Estina had approached Standard Bank, its authorised dealer, with an invoice making an application to send money to Gateway Ltd in the UAE.
“I also obtained evidence from Standard Bank. A formal request was submitted to the bank to provide Sars with an affidavit and all documentation. I requested documentation that was submitted to the bank for all the foreign payments on behalf of Estina,” he said.
Making reference to the invoice, he said it was issued by the entity named Gateway in the UAE, and the client was stated to be Estina.
According to Swart an invoice from Gateway Ltd of $3,448,800 was used to make an application to the bank to transfer money out of the country. The invoice was dated 15 September 2013. What was sent out to Gateway was $3,000,000 first on 20 September 2013. The second amount sent was $348,800, leaving a shortfall of $100,000.
Swart was continuing with his evidence on Tuesday IN the Pretoria regional court.
The state alleges that in March 2014, Indurjeeth, who worked for Estina, issued and signed a customs clearing instruction on behalf of the company to clearing agent UTi South Africa (Pty) Ltd.
According to the state, the company is duly registered in accordance with South African law and represented by Vasram, who was the sole director and shareholder.
The state alleges that Vasram and Indurjeeth were acquainted and associated, acting on their own volition or in collusion, during the commission of the offences. The two individually and jointly acted as an importer, the state said.
According to the state, Vasram registered Estina with the SA Revenue Service customs division as an import and export business and a Sars client.
On Monday, Swart told the court that the accused acting on behalf of Estina issued a written instruction (clearing instruction), to a clearing agent, UTi South Africa (Pty) Ltd (now DSV South Africa (Pty) Ltd). He explained to the court that UTi South Africa is a licensed clearing agent in terms of section 64B of the CEO Act.
The state also alleges that the goods imported were falsely declared as new and valued at $3,448,800 (R37,718,634).
Swart told the court that upon realising that the goods were not new, the importer should have approached the clearing agent and applied for a proper permit.
Having also approached the Reserve Bank, Swart told the court that he had tried to find an expert in the milk producers' organisation who could conduct a full valuation of the imported goods.
Swart said an investigating officer in the original Estina investigation in the Free State indicated to him that he had photos of the equipment that had been imported.
He told the court that he went to obtain a statement from the person who took the photographs. A request was also made to the Indian customs authority.
“Sars has a formal treaty between SA customs and Indian customs. In terms of the treaty, a request was forwarded through the customs side of Sars to the Indian customs to inquire what the value of the goods was when it was transported from India — to inquire what the total value of the shipment was, against what we had in S A,” he said.
He said the correspondence from the counsel general of India's office in Dubai included information about the importation, including screen prints of the customs declaration of each of the nine containers.
When the state wrapped up its examination in chief, the prosecution said he found it “rather quick and unexpected”.
The state questioned Swart in detail as to his involvement in the case. “Your involvement in this case only commenced a few years after the relevant acts were already committee.”
Swart indicated that the matter was assigned to him about six years after the importation.
The state also questioned Swart on the official process of importation and asked if the documents he testified on were before Sars before his investigations.
Without giving a clear answer, Swart indicated that though the documents were submitted through the electronic data information (EDI) system, they were received by an automated system.
He had testified that the customs clearance documents including the declaration were submitted through the Sars EDI system by the clearing agent.
TimesLIVE
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending
Related articles
Latest Videos