2022 (4) TMI 792 - HC - Customs

Seeking declaration of relaxation/condonation of the procedure lapse - non-mentioning of MEIS scheme in the shipping bills at the time of export - seeking direction to Respondent No.2 by themselves, their sub ordinate servants to award the MEIS to the petitioner on export of their products - realisation of export proceeds - HELD THAT - As per HBP Chapter 3, Clause 3.13 provides validity period and revalidation and according to which, Duty Credit Scrip issued on or after 1.1.2016 under Chapter 3 shall be valid for a period of 24 months from the date of issue and must be valid on the date on which actual debit of duty is made. Revalidation of Duty Credit Scrip shall not be permitted unless covered by Paragraph 2.20(c) of HBP. Clause 3.15 provides the last date of filing of the application for Duty Credit Scrips and according to which, the application shall be filed within a period of 12 months from the date of LEO date or 3 months from the date of uploading of EDI shipping bills on to the DGFT server by Customs - The Commissioner of Customs issued Public Notice No.88/2017 dated 5.7.2017 prescribing the procedure for amendment/conversion of the shipping bills from one scheme to another scheme and according to which the post-shipment amendments shall ordinarily be examined and disposed of within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the request from the CB/exporter and in case of delay beyond the stipulated period, the CB/exporter may approach the JC/ADC concerned to resolve the matter. Action of the DGFT in this petition by which the claim has been rejected - HELD THAT - The DGFT has rightly declined on the basis of the bills received in the server from the Customs Department. Therefore, the petitioners ought to have approached the Customs Department for correction of the shipping bills and after such correction in the shipping bills, the DGFT get jurisdiction or authority to examine the matter. Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Petition seeking relaxation/condonation of procedure lapse in MEIS scheme, issuance of writ of Mandamus for MEIS award, issuance of NOC for export goods certification.

Analysis:
1. The petitioners, a Private Limited Company engaged in manufacturing automobile parts, sought relief related to the Merchandise Export from India Scheme (MEIS) under the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20. The scheme provided incentives to Indian exporters based on realized exports, with specific procedures for availing benefits.

2. The petitioners claimed they could not avail MEIS benefits due to clerical errors in not marking "Y" in the reward column of shipping bills during 2017-18 and 2018-19. Despite submitting representations, the DGFT rejected their application, leading to the present petition.

3. The respondents, including DGFT and Commissioner of Customs, argued that non-marking of "Y" in shipping bills violated mandatory requirements, making the claims ineligible for MEIS benefits. They highlighted the procedure for amending shipping bills through Customs authorities for DGFT consideration.

4. The petitioners contended that the clerical errors should not bar them from MEIS benefits, citing judgments from Kerala and Bombay High Courts supporting similar exporters. They emphasized the need for fair treatment and non-discrimination in considering such claims.

5. The High Court acknowledged the petitioner's entitlement to MEIS benefits but upheld the rejection based on non-compliance with marking requirements. It directed the petitioners to approach the Customs Department for shipping bill corrections, enabling subsequent consideration by DGFT for MEIS benefits.

6. The Court dismissed the writ petition but allowed the petitioners to seek rectification from the Customs Department. It instructed the Customs to evaluate the claims through the appropriate committee, ensuring compliance with the law and the scheme.

7. In conclusion, the petition was dismissed, emphasizing the need for procedural compliance and corrective actions through the Customs Department for MEIS benefit consideration, maintaining the integrity of the scheme and legal processes.