Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2004 (8) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2004 (8) TMI 263 - AT - Customs


Issues involved: Eligibility of converting free shipping bills into DFRC shipping bills.

Summary:
The appeal filed by M/s. Sanghi Industries Ltd. raised the issue of whether they are entitled to convert their free shipping bills into DFRC shipping bills. The appellants had exported rotary kiln clinker under free shipping bills and later requested conversion to DFRC shipping bills. The Commissioner of Customs rejected their request citing reasons such as fuel and coal not being covered under DFRC and bauxite not meeting SION entry specifications. The appellants argued that furnace oil and coal are covered under DFRC, and they fulfilled the conditions specified in Circular No. 6/03-Cus. They also referred to a previous Tribunal decision allowing such conversions without proving coercion by Customs. Ultimately, the Tribunal allowed the conversion of free shipping bills into DFRC shipping bills for exports made through Mundra Port but not for exports through Jakhao Port, partly allowing the appeal.

The Board's circulars clarified the conditions for allowing conversion of shipping bills, emphasizing the need to prove the use of inputs, export of the product under relevant SION, and fulfillment of all Scheme conditions. The Tribunal's interpretation in a previous case highlighted that conversion into DFRC shipping bills can be permitted without proving coercion by Customs. In the present case, the appellants filed free shipping bills to expedite exports and later sought conversion to DFRC shipping bills. The Tribunal noted that the conditions specified in Circular No. 40/03-Cus. were not violated, and the appellants were not claiming DFRC benefit for certain inputs. The Tribunal found that conditions (a) and (b) of the circular dated 28-1-03 were met, as the use of coal, magnesite refractory bricks, and furnace oil was certified, and the export of clinker was established. Regarding condition (c), the Tribunal observed that exports through Mundra Port, a notified port, were eligible for DFRC benefit, while exports through Jakhao Port were not eligible. Consequently, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, permitting conversion for exports through Mundra Port but not for exports through Jakhao Port.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates