9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (10) TMI 268 - HC - CustomsRejection of petitioner s application for amendment of the 13 bills of entry - It is petitioner s case that in the bills of entry as filed petitioner had erroneously given a particular Goods and Services Tax Identification Number (GSTIN), whereas it should be some other GSTIN - Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT - While considering application under Section 149 of the said Act, if the goods have been cleared for home consumption, which in this case has been, the proper officer has to only consider the documentary evidence which was in existence at the time the goods were cleared and nothing more. There is nothing to indicate in the impugned order that petitioner had not submitted the documentary evidence which was in existence at the time the goods were cleared. Such a ground has also not been taken when petitioner had approached this Court in the earlier round and, therefore, in our view, there cannot be any impediment to grant petitioner s request for amending the bills of entry. The impugned order dated 29th October 2021 is hereby quashed and set aside. Respondent no.3 is hereby directed to permit amending the bills of entry as per Section 149 of the said Act - Petition disposed off.
Issues involved:
1. Petitioner's application for amendment of documents under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. Rejection of petitioner's application for amendment of bills of entry by respondent no.3. 3. Interpretation of Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962. 4. Consideration of documentary evidence for amendment post clearance of goods. 5. Quashing of the impugned order dated 29th October 2021 and directing respondent no.3 to permit amending the bills of entry. Detailed Analysis: Issue 1: The petitioner sought to amend 13 bills of entry under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, due to errors in the GSTIN mentioned. The petitioner had erroneously provided a particular GSTIN in the bills of entry, which needed correction. The petitioner had successfully amended similar errors in other Commissionerates previously. Issue 2: Respondent no.3 rejected the petitioner's application for amendment, citing that GST Laws do not permit such post-clearance amendments under Section 149 of the Act. Despite being remanded, respondent no.3 did not consider the application as required by the provisions and rejected it on untenable grounds. Issue 3: The Court analyzed Section 149 of the Act, emphasizing the importance of considering documentary evidence that existed at the time of goods clearance for home consumption. The Court noted that the petitioner had not failed to submit the necessary evidence at the time of clearance, and there was no valid reason to deny the amendment. Issue 4: The Court quashed the impugned order dated 29th October 2021 and directed respondent no.3 to permit the amendment of the bills of entry as per Section 149 of the Act. The Court highlighted the specific details to be amended in the bills of entry and disposed of the petition accordingly. In conclusion, the judgment focused on the petitioner's right to seek amendment under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, the proper consideration of documentary evidence for post-clearance amendments, and the directive to allow the necessary corrections in the bills of entry.
|
