2023 (7) TMI 597 - AT - Customs

Conversion of shipping bill - Request by the supporting manufacturer - DFRC shipping bills into DEEC Scheme - case of Revenue is that the present applicant being supporting manufacturer (and M/s. B. Framjee Co., being merchant exporter as per the body of the shipping bill) could not have claimed the conversion from one scheme to another - HELD THAT - The submissions of the appellant is agreed upon as what is to be considered is amendment in the shipping bill under Section 149 of the Customs Act, which is an independent provision and has to be examined as per its own ambit. There can be no reasons not to permit amendment under Section 149, if the requirement of pre-existing documents was fulfilled as mentioned in proviso. In fact, the benefit sought being an export benefit has to be liberally construed, and so are the relevant Export Notifications. There are also merit in the submissions made by the advocate for the appellant that the shipping bills even when filed by M/s. B. Framjee Co., clearly indicated in the body of the shipping bills that they were allowed to claim the benefits and likewise the liabilities if any will equally be that of the supporting manufacturers in the matter, which were M/s Royal Cushion Vinyl Products Limited. Such a dispensation having been permitted and not specifically restrained under the relevant scheme, the benefit of Exports Scheme can well be claimed by the present appellant after suitable amendment in the relevant shipping bills. The request of the appellant to allow amendment sought by them after examination of availability of relevant license etc. at the time of export is agreed upon - matter remanded back to original authority to implement the same by allowing amendment as per law - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment include the conversion of shipping bills from one scheme to another, specifically from DFRC to DEEC, under the Customs Act, 1962.

Conversion of Shipping Bills:
The appellant, engaged in the manufacture and export of Vinyl Flooring, sought the conversion of eleven shipping bills filed under the DFRC Scheme to the DEEC Scheme. The appellant argued that the procedure under both schemes was the same, emphasizing that the SION norms were identical, and the goods were used in manufacturing as required by Customs Notification. The advocate relied on various case laws to support the conversion, highlighting the amendment provision under Section 149 of the Customs Act. The appellant contended that they were entitled to seek conversion based on their role as the supporting manufacturer. The Tribunal agreed with the submissions, stating that the benefit of export schemes should be liberally construed, and there were substantial similarities between the two schemes. The Tribunal allowed the appeals and remanded the matter for the implementation of the conversion as per law.

Supporting Manufacturer vs. Merchant Exporter:
The Authorized Representative argued that the appellant, as a supporting manufacturer, could not claim conversion from one scheme to another, as only the merchant exporter could make such a request. It was emphasized that the licensee in the matter was a different entity, and the appellant did not hold a DEEC License. The Tribunal, however, found merit in the appellant's arguments, noting that the shipping bills clearly indicated the appellant's eligibility to claim benefits and liabilities as a supporting manufacturer. The Tribunal held that the relevant exemption notifications should be construed liberally, and thus, allowed the conversion sought by the appellant.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the appeals, remanding the matter back to the original authority for the implementation of the conversion from DFRC to DEEC Scheme. The judgment highlighted the importance of liberal construction of export benefit schemes and the relevance of pre-existing documents for amendment under Section 149 of the Customs Act.