2020 (3) TMI 857 - AT - Customs

Amendment in the shipping bill - Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 - rejection of request on the ground that as per the DGFT Public Notice such correction was only allowed for the period 01.06.2015 to 30.09.2015 Since, the present shipping bill were filed thereafter the correction cannot be made in the shipping bills - HELD THAT - Only because DGFT Public Notice prescribe certain period that doesn t mean after that period, amendment cannot be made. Section 149 clearly provides for amendment in the documents such as Shipping Bill Entry, Bill of etc, in the case where document is on record at the relevant time - In the present case, at the time of export which is established from shipping bill wherein the appellant have categorically claimed the benefit of MEIS, therefore, there are no reason why the amendment in the Shipping Bill under section 149 should not be allowed. The appellant is entitled for amendment in the Shipping Bill as claimed by them - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Amendment in Shipping Bill under Section 149 - Denial of amendment by Lower Authorities - Interpretation of DGFT Public Notice - Claiming benefits under MEIS scheme - Clerical error in shipping bill - Judicial precedents supporting the amendment.

Analysis:
The case involved the appellant exporting goods under the Merchandise Exports from India Scheme (MEIS) but facing rejection for amending the shipping bill due to a clerical error. The appellant had declared the MEIS claim on the first page but mistakenly mentioned "NO" in the "Scheme Reward" column on the second page. The Adjudicating Authority and Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the rejection citing a DGFT Public Notice allowing corrections only for a specific period. However, the Hon'ble Member (Judicial) disagreed, emphasizing Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, permitting amendments in documents already on record at the time of export.

The appellant argued for the amendment, highlighting the clear intention to claim MEIS benefits and attributing the error to a clerical mistake. Citing judicial precedents like Kancro Ingrdiantes Ltd and others, the appellant sought relief under Section 149. The Authorized Representative for the revenue supported the lower authorities' decision.

After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Member found the denial of amendment solely based on the DGFT Public Notice unreasonable. Referencing the co-ordinate Bench's decision in Kancor Ingredients Ltd, the Member emphasized the appellant's explicit MEIS claim in the shipping bill, warranting the amendment under Section 149. The Member concurred with the Bangalore Tribunal's findings and allowed the amendment in the Shipping Bill, echoing the principles upheld in previous judgments like Pasha International and others.

Consequently, the impugned orders denying the amendment were set aside, and the appeals were allowed, granting the appellant the right to amend the Shipping Bill as requested. The judgment emphasized the importance of honoring the appellant's clear intention to claim MEIS benefits and rectifying procedural defects through amendments under Section 149, in line with established legal precedents.