2019 (2) TMI 1187 - HC - Customs

Amendment in shipping bills - Benefit under Merchandise Exports from India Scheme (MEIS) - petitioner inadvertently opted for No instead of Yes in the shipping bills - Corrections to be made is denied on the ground that now the EDI system is being followed and not manual system is in place - Held that - Identical issue decided in the case of SAINT GOBAIN INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA 2018 (11) TMI 536 - KERALA HIGH COURT , where it was held that petitioner shall produce the said NOC before the 4th respondent and seek the benefits from the 4th respondent. In the present case also, the second respondent can be directed to issue N.O.C. to enable the petitioner to avail the benefit from the third respondent - petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Claim for benefit under Merchandise Exports from India Scheme (M.E.I.S) due to inadvertent error in shipping bill.
2. Inability to correct errors in E.D.I. system compared to manual system.
3. Comparison with a similar case in the High Court of Kerala.
4. Direction for issuance of No Objection Certificate (N.O.C) to rectify the error.
5. Expedited consideration of the claim by the concerned authorities.

The judgment addressed the issue of a Writ petitioner, a manufacturer and exporter of "Bags and made-ups," who filed shipping bills for export of cotton shopping bags intending to claim benefits under M.E.I.S. However, due to an inadvertent error, the petitioner selected "No" instead of "Yes" in the shipping bills. The court noted that while corrections were possible in the manual system under Section 149 of the Customs Act, the E.D.I. system did not allow such modifications. Citing a similar case in the High Court of Kerala, the court directed the second respondent to issue a No Objection Certificate (N.O.C) to enable the petitioner to avail benefits from the third respondent. The third respondent was instructed to promptly consider the claim and make necessary decisions. The judgment emphasized that the petitioner should not suffer due to a clerical mistake and disposed of the Writ petition without costs, ordering the connected Miscellaneous petition to be closed.

In conclusion, the judgment highlighted the importance of rectifying inadvertent errors in official documents to ensure exporters receive entitled benefits. It underscored the need for administrative flexibility in cases of genuine mistakes, especially when transitioning from manual to electronic systems. By referencing a precedent from another High Court, the judgment set a precedent for issuing No Objection Certificates to correct such errors and expedite the processing of claims. The decision aimed to uphold fairness and prevent undue hardship on exporters due to minor errors, showcasing the judiciary's role in ensuring procedural justice and administrative efficiency in matters concerning trade benefits and export regulations.