2020 (9) TMI 751 - HC - Customs

MEIS Scheme - mistake while submitting Shipping bills - the petitioner's representative instead of entering 'Y' for each line item, selected 'Y' only for the first line item and did not make any selection for remaining items - contention of respondents is that the Director General of Foreign Trade cannot be blamed for the lapse committed by the writ petitioner - HELD THAT - The exporter ought not to suffer for the inadvertent mistake committed by him. When the filing was done manually, Section 149 of Customs Act provides for effecting corrections. Now, there has been a shift from the manual system to EDI System. In the EDI System, approval is also automated. Since the petitioner had opted only for 'Yes', as far as the first line item is concerned and did not opt for the remaining items, by system default, for the remaining items the system opted 'No' automatically. As already pointed out, this was a sheer inadvertent mistake committed by the writ petitioner's representative. The petitioner had actually intended to claim the benefit under the aforesaid Scheme. The petitioner deserves to be given one more opportunity to set right things. After the shipping bills were filed, they are transferred to NSDL (National Securities Depository Limited), which is a Digital Depository. Unless, the third respondent specifically instructs NSDL, they will not be in a position to forward the petitioner's shipping bills to the second respondent. It is seen that the petitioner had been corresponding only with NSDL all these months. The petitioner is permitted to make a formal request to the third respondent. After the third respondent receives such a request from the petitioner herein, the 3rd respondent /Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin will issue No Objection Certificate to enable the petitioner to avail the benefit and also instruct NSDL to transmit all the relevant materials to the Development Commissioner, MEPZ, Tambaram, Chennai - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to rejection of request for availing rewards under MEIS scheme due to inadvertent mistake in filing shipping bills.

Analysis:
The petitioner, an exporter, had their shipping bills filed with an error in selecting intent for availing rewards under MEIS scheme. The mistake led to the system marking all items as 'No' instead of 'Yes,' impacting the benefits. Despite the error being discovered later, the Policy Relaxation Committee rejected the petitioner's request. The main contention was that the Director General of Foreign Trade lacked relevant material due to the system error, leading to non-forwarding of shipping bills. The Customs authority had not been approached by the petitioner. The court considered a similar case where the exporter was not held liable for an inadvertent mistake. The shift to an automated EDI system was noted, emphasizing the need to rectify errors. The petitioner was granted the opportunity to request the Commissioner of Customs for a No Objection Certificate to rectify the mistake and avail benefits under the MEIS scheme.

The court allowed the petitioner to approach the Commissioner of Customs to rectify the error and instructed NSDL to transmit relevant materials for consideration. The Development Commissioner was impleaded as a respondent due to the change in the competent authority. The Development Commissioner was tasked with expeditiously considering the petitioner's claim and issuing appropriate orders upon receiving the necessary documents. The writ petition was disposed of with directions for further proceedings, with no costs imposed.