2020 (2) TMI 202 - AT - Customs

Conversion of shipping bills - conversion from Drawback scheme to Duty Free Import Authorization (DFIA) Scheme - request for conversion was rejected on the ground that the appellant exporter made the request for conversion after three months from the date of let Export Order in violation of period prescribed under Board Circular No 36/2010-Cus dated 23.09.2010 - HELD THAT - From Section 149 of Customs Act 1962 it is clear that no time limit is prescribed. The request of the appellant for conversion was rejected on the sole ground of limitation as prescribed under Board Circular No. 36/2010-Cus. Since the time limit has not been prescribed under the act, the same cannot be fixed by way of the circular. Therefore, if at all there is a time limit by way of circular it is only procedural requirement. Therefore, on this ground of limitation, application could not have been rejected, particularly when circular prescribing time limit is without authority of any statutory provision, act and rules supported. It is settled law that the time limit prescribed by the Board Circular is not binding as same is not statutory provision in terms of section 149 of the Customs Act 1962. The appellant is legally entitled for conversion of drawback Shipping Bills to DFIA Shipping Bills in respect of 184 Shipping Bills as per the list provided in appeal along with the appeal memo - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Conversion of shipping bills from Drawback scheme to Duty Free Import Authorization (DFIA) Scheme.
2. Time limit for conversion as per Board Circular No. 36/2010-Cus.
3. Legal entitlement for conversion under Section 149 of the Customs Act 1962.

Analysis:
1. Conversion of Shipping Bills:
The appeal was filed against the rejection of the Appellant's request to convert 204 shipping bills from Drawback scheme to DFIA scheme due to a delay in submission. The Appellant argued that the time limit prescribed in Board Circular No. 36/2010-Cus is procedural and not a statutory requirement under Section 149 of the Customs Act 1962. The Appellant offered to deposit the drawback amount along with interest, ensuring no prejudice to the revenue. Previous judgments were cited where conversion was allowed despite delays.

2. Time Limit for Conversion:
The Authorized Representative for the revenue emphasized the violation of the time limit specified in the Board Circular, citing the Gujarat High Court judgment supporting the rejection of the conversion request. However, the Tribunal noted that Section 149 of the Customs Act 1962 does not prescribe a time limit for such conversions. It was established that circular time limits cannot override statutory provisions. The Tribunal highlighted that previous decisions supported conversion even in cases of delayed requests.

3. Legal Entitlement under Section 149:
The Tribunal analyzed Section 149 of the Customs Act 1962, which allows amendments to documents without a specified time limit. It was concluded that the rejection based solely on the circular's time limit was unjustified. Relying on previous judgments and statutory provisions, the Tribunal held that the Appellant was legally entitled to convert 184 shipping bills to DFIA bills. The Commissioner was directed to issue the necessary certificate for revalidating the DFIA licenses.

In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal and granting consequential reliefs in accordance with the law. The decision was pronounced on 04.02.2020 by the members of the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad.