9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 194 - AT - CustomsFailure to mention Advance License Number in Bills of entry Conversion of shipping bills - Denial of advance license scheme Appellants failed to mention Advance License Numbers in nine shipping bills under which appellants have exported goods, DGFT has denied benefit under DEPB scheme and appellants sought to claim alternative export benefit under advance license scheme Hence Appellant sought for amendment in shipping bills under Section 149 of Customs Act which was denied Held that - goods were cleared from factory of manufacture through ARE-1 On perusal of ARE-1 it is clearly declared that export is in discharge of export obligation under Quantity base Advance License ARE-1 were duly verified by Superintendent in charge of factory which was again verified by customs officer at Fort Therefore, it is clearly confirmed that said goods mentioned under these shipping bills were exported under Advance License Scheme and these documents were in existence before export of goods Therefore tribunal fully agree with appellant s contention and hold that appellants are eligible for conversion of all nine shipping bills from DEPB scheme to Advance License Scheme Accordingly, impugned order is set aside Decided in favour of Assesse.
Issues:
Conversion of shipping bills from DEPB Scheme to Advance License Scheme, denial of amendment by Commissioner Customs, applicability of Section 149 of the Customs Act for scheme conversion. Analysis: The appellant, a cotton yarn exporter, appealed against the Commissioner's Order, seeking amendment of shipping bills to include Advance License Numbers for DEPB Scheme conversion. The appellant exported goods under EPCG and Advance License Schemes but failed to mention Advance License Numbers in seven shipping bills. The Commissioner denied the request for amendment, leading to the appeal. The appellant argued that all goods were exported following the ARE-1 Procedure, duly examined and signed by customs officers, declaring export obligations under advance licenses. The appellant cited previous Tribunal decisions supporting their case. The respondent, however, supported the Commissioner's decision, stating that the amendment post-export was rightly rejected, citing relevant court decisions. The main issue was the conversion of shipping bills from DEPB to Advance License Scheme. The Tribunal analyzed a specific shipping bill, verifying that goods were exported under Advance License Scheme, as evidenced by ARE-1 declarations signed by customs officers. Referring to Section 149 of the Customs Act and Circular No. 4/2004, the Tribunal noted that conversion between schemes is allowed if documentary evidence existed pre-export. Given the clear evidence in ARE-1 forms and customs endorsements, the Tribunal agreed with the appellant, allowing the conversion of all nine shipping bills to Advance License Scheme. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief. The Tribunal's decision emphasized the importance of pre-export documentary evidence for scheme conversion under the Customs Act, supporting the appellant's eligibility for the conversion of shipping bills from DEPB to Advance License Scheme. The judgment highlighted the significance of proper documentation and customs verification in determining scheme applicability for export obligations, aligning with previous Tribunal decisions on similar matters.
|
