2023 (12) TMI 531 - AT - Customs

Amendment of Bills of entry - Essentiality Certificate was not in existence at the time of clearance of the goods - Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, to deny the benefit of duty exemption provided under notification No.84/1997-Customs dated 11.11.1997 - HELD THAT - On reading of the above provisions, it transpires that amendment of the documents filed for the import or export goods is permissible under the statute. The proviso clause appended to section 149 provides that amendment of the documents are permissible on the basis of evidence in existence at the time of clearance of the goods from the customs station. In this case, it is not the case of Revenue that the impugned capital goods were not imported by the appellants for accomplishing the purpose mentioned in the notification dated 11.11.1997. This fact is evident from the application dated 10.10.2019 filed by the appellants before the competent authorities for issuance of the DEC. Since, the B/Es in question were filed much after the date of such application, seeking for availment of duty exemption, it cannot be said that the department was ignorant about the entitlement of the appellants for such benefit provided in the notification. It is also an admitted fact on record that the application dated 10.10.2019 filed by the appellants were favorably considered by the competent authority for the duty exemption entitlement viz. Essentiality Certificate. Since, such certificate was issued upon subjective analysis that the goods are meant for use in the designated project(s), spelt out in the notification, denial of such benefit by the department is contrary to the legislative intent behind issuance of such notification, which was specifically designed in the public interest to grant the benefit provided thereunder. The impugned orders are set aside and the appeals are allowed by way of remand to the original authority for the limited purpose of verification of the Essentiality Certificate dated 08.05.2020 and thereafter, for grant of the benefit of duty exemption provided under the notification No. 84/1997-Customs dated 11.11.1997 - Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Denial of benefit of duty exemption under notification dated 11.11.1997 due to absence of Essentiality Certificate at the time of clearance of goods.

Summary:
The case involved appeals against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai-II, relating to the clearance of 'escalators with accessories' by M/s Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Limited (DMRC). The goods were classified under CTI 8428 4000 and were imported for a project financed by the United Nations or an International Organization, approved by the Government of India. The appellants self-assessed the goods at specified rates, as the Essentiality Certificate was delayed. The appeals were rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals) on the grounds that the Certificate was not available at the time of clearance.

The appellant argued that the application for Duty Exemption Certificate (DEC) was made before filing the Bills of Entry, and they should not be penalized for the delay in processing. They contended that the goods were intended for specific use as per the notification, citing relevant Supreme Court judgments. The Revenue's representative opposed, stating that the self-assessment was final and no provision for duty exemption was made at the time of clearance.

The Tribunal examined the case records and found that the denial of duty exemption benefit was based on Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962. It noted that the department was aware of the entitlement for duty exemption as per the notification, and the Essentiality Certificate was issued subsequently. Citing Supreme Court judgments, the Tribunal emphasized the importance of fulfilling conditions for obtaining exemption benefits and interpreted the notification liberally.

The Tribunal disagreed with the Commissioner's reliance on a different judgment, as the appellants had complied with the notification requirements before importation. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed for remand to verify the Essentiality Certificate and grant the duty exemption benefit under the notification.

In conclusion, the appeals were allowed by way of remand for further verification and consideration, with the appellants to be granted a personal hearing before a decision is made.