MARITIME Network Sdn Bhd is seeking a written explanation from the Royal Malaysian Customs Department (JKDM) following a meeting with the Ministry of Finance over the handling of Atlanta crude discharged at Tanjung Langsat under a K8 declaration.
At the September 25 discussion, chaired by MOF Tax Division Under-Secretary Datuk John Patrick Antonysamy and attended by JKDM officers, the chair expressed the view that there was no duty implication on the cargo as presented.
He also identified a separate question for Customs: how the cargo brought in under K8 came to be transferred to another party. Maritime Network says both points need to be recorded and explained in writing before the company can close its compliance file.
“If MOF’s position is that no duty is payable, we are asking for the provisions, exemptions and factual assumptions behind that conclusion.
“We will respect a reasoned answer. But a verbal conclusion cannot tell a shipping agent which documents supported a cargo transfer, what declaration closed the movement, or why the agent was compounded,” said Maritime Network managing director Datuk Seri R. Jeyenderan.
The meeting focused principally on approximately 42,051 tonnes associated with MT Invictus.
Maritime has also raised questions separately about another Atlanta crude cargo carried by MT Marlin Santorini.
The two cargoes had a combined declared value of more than RM220 million; that figure is their declared cargo value, not an estimate of unpaid tax.
Maritime said a K8 document discussed at the meeting was interpreted differently by those present: its representatives questioned whether an outward record continued to describe Atlanta crude despite reported blending into very low sulphur fuel oil, while an officer described the document shown as an inward movement between Customs stations.
Maritime is asking JKDM to resolve that issue using the full set of certified declarations, warehouse records and final movement documents.
It is not asserting that a false outward declaration has been established.
The company is also requesting a separate review of a compound it says was imposed over manifest documentation.
It wants JKDM to state the precise alleged omission, why responsibility was assigned to Maritime, and what review route is available.
MOF’s verbal conclusion on duty did not itself cancel the compound.
The Malaysian Investment Development Authority (MIDA), in a written response on September 17, said that questions concerning activity at a Public Licensed Warehouse and applicable duties should be directed to JKDM.
Maritime said it is now seeking a coordinated written answer from MOF and Customs identifying the applicable legal instruments, any approvals or exemptions, and the records supporting their conclusions.
“This is not a request to declare somebody guilty. It is a request to show the governing rule and the transaction trail,” Jeyenderan said.
“If the process was permitted and no tax was due, put that reasoning on record. If a declaration needs correcting, say what should be corrected and by whom. Everyone in the industry needs an answer they can actually follow.”
Maritime said it would consider and fairly reflect any substantive written response from MOF or JKDM.
As at the time of writing, the company said it had not received a formal written determination addressing all the issues discussed at the Sept 25 meeting. – September 29, 2026
.jpeg)
