2015 (10) TMI 1537 - HC - Customs

Refusal for conversion free Shipping bills to DEEC shipping bills Appellant contends that Superintendent of Central Excise may depute the Inspector to examine and seal the consignment if he is not available Further contended that authorities have refused to act on the ground that Inspector not duly authorized officer and the same cannot be held against the assesse Revenue contested that benefit of DEEC scheme and decoded licence number was not mentioned in ARE Forms Further contends that consignments should be examined and sealed by Superintendent of Central Excise and authorities were justified in declining the request. Held That - As the consignments have been examined and sealed by the Inspector, it cannot be held that assessee is not entitled to benefit Moreover, without an authorization by Superintendent of Central Excise, Inspector cannot examine and as such both the authorities have not applied their mind in this direction Appeal allowed and order set-aside Matter remanded back to the Commissioner of Customs Decided in favour of the Assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Conversion request of free Shipping Bills to DEEC Scheme Shipping Bills denied by authorities.
2. Examination and sealing of export consignments under DEEC scheme by authorized officers.
3. Entitlement to benefits under DEEC scheme based on inspection authority.

Analysis:
1. The appellant, a Private Limited Company engaged in exporting electronic goods, filed 15 Shipping Bills under the free category instead of DEEC scheme. After fulfilling export obligations, the appellant sought conversion of free Shipping Bills to DEEC Scheme Shipping Bills for redemption of Advance Licence. The request was rejected by authorities citing non-fulfillment of examination and scrutiny requirements for DEEC scheme exports. The Tribunal upheld this decision, leading to the appeal before the High Court.

2. The appellant contended that consignments were examined and sealed by an Inspector, duly authorized in absence of the Superintendent of Central Excise, as per law. However, authorities argued that the appellant did not claim DEEC scheme benefits in ARE forms and exported under free shipping bills. The law mandates examination and sealing by the Superintendent for DEEC scheme benefits, which the Inspector's action does not fulfill. The core issue revolved around the necessity of Superintendent's authorization for inspection under DEEC scheme.

3. The High Court analyzed Circular No. 415/48/98-CX, emphasizing the requirement of Superintendent's examination and sealing for DEEC scheme exports. It highlighted the need for proper authorization and post-facto approval in exceptional circumstances. The Court noted that without Superintendent's authorization, the Inspector's actions may not confer DEEC scheme benefits. The authorities failed to investigate whether the Inspector's examination was validly authorized, crucial for determining the appellant's entitlement to DEEC scheme benefits. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside previous orders and remitting the matter to the Commissioner of Customs for a detailed examination to make a lawful decision.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment showcases the legal intricacies involved in the denial of the conversion request and the crucial role of authorized officers in examining and sealing export consignments under the DEEC scheme.