2010 (8) TMI 284 - AT - Customs

Shipping bill - conversion of free shipping bill into drawback shipping bill - observation of the Commissioner that he has no powers to convert a free shipping bill into drawback shipping bill does not stand supported by the rule Held that - Amendment of shipping bill permitted even after goods have left the county on basis of documentary evidence under sec.149 of customs Act, 1962 furnace oil according to the appellants has been exported as bulk cargo, the quantity, description and other details would have been verified since let export order is given in the case of ships by the customs officers after loading takes place commissioner directed to allow conversion of free shipping bills into drawback shipping bill

Summary

Issues:
Conversion of free shipping bills into drawback shipping bills.

Analysis:
In the present appeal, the Commissioner rejected the request for conversion of free shipping bills into drawback shipping bills. The Tribunal initially allowed the appeals directing the Commissioner to permit the conversion. However, the Revenue filed an appeal against this decision, leading to the High Court setting aside the Tribunal's order and instructing a fresh decision. The key contention revolved around the power of the Commissioner to grant exemption for drawback claims under different rates. The appellant argued that the circular relied upon by the Commissioner did not impose restrictions mentioned in it. The Tribunal analyzed the provisions of Rule 12 of the Drawback Rules and noted that the distinction made by the Board between industry rates and brand rates was not supported by the law. It referenced previous cases to emphasize the need for consistency in following Tribunal decisions unless a superior authority directs otherwise.

The Tribunal further delved into the interpretation of Rule 12 and the Board's circular, highlighting the Commissioner's authority to amend shipping bills under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962. It emphasized that the Commissioner's power to allow drawback on shipping bills without specific details effectively amounted to an amendment or conversion. The failure of the Commissioner to consider this provision and the availability of documentary evidence for amendment were crucial in the Tribunal's decision. By aligning with the precedent set in a previous case, the Tribunal directed the Commissioner to permit the conversion of shipping bills into drawback shipping bills. However, it clarified that the final determination of eligibility and amount of drawback would be as per the law and customs authorities' discretion.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision centered on the interpretation of relevant legal provisions, the Commissioner's authority to amend shipping bills, and the consistency in following Tribunal precedents. The judgment emphasized the need for adherence to legal provisions and the consideration of documentary evidence in allowing conversions of shipping bills.