2024 (9) TMI 512 - HC - Customs

Eligibility for the benefit of Merchandize Exports from India Scheme (MEIS) under Chapter 3 of the Foreign Trade Policy - Amendment of shipping bills as sought for in the petitioner's representation - transmission of the shipping bills online to the DGFT server to enable the petitioner to claim the MEIS benefit - HELD THAT - There are no dispute that the petitioner had exported the goods namely Fruit pulp, Mango puree etc., which are eligible for the benefit of Merchandize Exports from India Scheme (MEIS) under Chapter 3 of the Foreign Trade Policy. There is no dispute that the petitioner has also claimed duty drawback under Section 75 of the Customs Act, 1975 read with Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Duty drawback Rules, 1995. There are no records to indicates that the parallel incentives under Section 75 of the Customs Act, 1961 read with the aforesaid Rule and the Customs Notification has been denied to the petitioner. Therefore the benefit of Merchandize Exports from India Scheme (MEIS) under Chapter 3 of the Foreign Trade Policy ought not to be denied. The export of goods stands confirmed. The Courts have been liberal and have been granting reliefs to the exporters under the scheme. No contrary stand is taken in this writ petition. That apart, the legitimate exports cannot be denied, if the petitioner had made actual exports. Since there is no other material available to come to a conclusion that the petitioner was not otherwise dis-entitled for export incentives under the Merchandize Exports from India Scheme, this writ petition has to be allowed. The respondent Nos.3 and 4 are therefore directed to ensure that the shipping bills are suitably amended for the petitioner to claim export incentives on the exports made by the petitioner under the Merchandize Exports from India Scheme. Incentives to be granted to the petitioner will be without prejudice to the rights of the Department to recover the same, in case, any other discrepancies are noticed in the exports made by the petitioner - petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Claim for Merchandize Export from India Scheme (MEIS) benefits.
2. Failure to press "YES" in the reward column of shipping bills.
3. Rejection of request by authorities under Foreign Trade Policy.
4. Interpretation of Circular No.36/2010-Cus regarding alteration of shipping bills.
5. Dispute over eligibility for MEIS benefits.
6. Time limit for amending shipping bills.
7. Examination of consignments for entitlement to incentives.

Analysis:

1. The petitioner exported consignments of Fruit pulp and claimed duty drawback under the Customs Act, 1962, along with entitlement to MEIS benefits. The petitioner's failure to press "YES" in the reward column of the shipping bills led to a dispute regarding eligibility for MEIS benefits.

2. The authorities under the Foreign Trade Policy rejected the petitioner's request for amending the shipping bills, citing that N marked shipping bills were ineligible for MEIS benefits due to non-evaluation under the Exports' Risk Management System. The rejection was based on the communication dated 19.08.2020.

3. The petitioner argued eligibility for MEIS benefits under Chapter 3 of the Foreign Trade Policy, emphasizing compliance with reward criteria and absence from ineligible categories. Reference was made to similar cases decided by other courts, supporting the petitioner's claim for benefits.

4. The respondents contended that the petitioner's request for incentive alteration was made long after the exports were completed, highlighting Circular No.36/2010-Cus provisions allowing conversion of shipping bills under specific conditions, including time limits and documentary evidence requirements.

5. The court observed that there was no denial of duty drawback benefits to the petitioner and confirmed the legitimacy of the exports, indicating that MEIS benefits should not be denied. Previous court decisions favored exporters under similar circumstances, leading to the allowance of the writ petition.

6. The court directed the authorities to amend the shipping bills to enable the petitioner to claim MEIS benefits, emphasizing that the incentives granted would be subject to potential recovery if discrepancies were later identified in the exports. The judgment concluded by allowing the writ petition without costs.

This detailed analysis covers the key issues raised in the legal judgment, providing a comprehensive overview of the arguments presented by both parties and the court's decision regarding the entitlement to MEIS benefits and the amendment of shipping bills.