Elcardo Customs fraud allegations involve undervalued imports, a Mercedes-Benz tax loss and two suspects remanded by a Colombo court.
The Elcardo Customs fraud investigation has widened after a Colombo court remanded two suspects over alleged tax evasion involving luxury vehicles and construction materials.
Colombo Additional Magistrate Oshadha Migara Maharachchi ordered Athila Ravinaka Weeraratne and company employee Achini Tharaka Mihirani Dias remanded until August 5. Court reporting identified Weeraratne as the son of Elcardo’s owner.
Get Breaking News First
on WhatsApp
Elcardo Customs Fraud Allegations Involve Undervalued Imports
Sri Lanka Customs told the court that investigators were examining an alleged scheme involving invoices that declared imported goods below their actual value.
Customs said an undervalued declaration for a Mercedes-Benz vehicle had caused the Government a tax loss of Rs. 4,145,581.
Investigators also cited records involving goods invoiced at US$49,815.75. Letters of credit had reportedly been issued for US$19,926.30, leaving a difference of US$29,889.45.
Customs asked the court to impose overseas travel bans on three company directors linked to the investigation. Officials said several other suspects could also face arrest.
The allegations have not been proven in court, and the suspects remain entitled to the presumption of innocence.
Defence Challenges Evidence Presented to Court
President’s Counsel Nalinda Indatissa, appearing for the suspects, argued that investigators had not submitted a proper summary of evidence.
He said Section 127A of the Customs Ordinance gave the Magistrate discretion over further remand. He also cited previous Supreme Court decisions requiring investigators to place sufficient evidence before the court.
Customs opposed bail, arguing that releasing the suspects could create a risk of evidence being destroyed or interfered with.
After hearing both sides, the Magistrate remanded the suspects until August 5 and ordered investigators to submit a progress report on that date.
The case places renewed attention on alleged invoice undervaluation, Customs enforcement and the protection of government tax revenue.
