9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Interpretation of the date of presentation of the Bill of Entry under Section 46 of the Customs Act. Analysis: The appeal revolved around determining the correct date of presentation of the Bill of Entry under Section 46 of the Customs Act. The appellant argued that the date should be considered as the day when the Bill of Entry was formally noted by the Import Department for duty assessment, i.e., 28-3-1995, while the lower authorities considered the date of submission to the concerned clerk, i.e., 6-2-1995, as the relevant date. The appellant contended that as per Section 46 of the Customs Act, the relevant date should be when the Bill of Entry is presented before the proper officer designated for this purpose. They emphasized that the entry by the proper officer is crucial, and any administrative procedures developed by the department should not detract from this requirement. Conversely, the respondent argued that the date of presentation should be based on the date it was submitted to the concerned clerk as per the department's procedure, regardless of when it reaches the proper officer. They relied on administrative convenience and past court decisions to support their stance. The Tribunal examined Section 46 of the Customs Act, emphasizing that the importer must make the entry by presenting the Bill of Entry to the proper officer designated under the Act. The definition of a proper officer was crucial, and it was established that the clerk or appraiser was not necessarily the proper officer unless assigned by the Collector of Customs. The Tribunal highlighted that the administrative procedure of presenting the Bill of Entry to the appraiser was discontinued and was not a statutory requirement. They differentiated a mere physical handover from the statutory entry process by the proper officer, emphasizing the importance of compliance with Section 46 for assessment purposes. Ultimately, the Tribunal held that the date when the proper officer received the Bill of Entry should be considered the correct date for assessment, aligning with the statutory provisions. They emphasized that administrative orders cannot override statutory requirements, and the spirit of the law must be upheld. In conclusion, the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the significance of complying with Section 46 of the Customs Act for the proper assessment of imported goods.
|
