Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2024 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (11) TMI 808 - HC - CustomsEligibility to Merchandise Exports from India Scheme ( MEIS ) benefit due to error in shipping bills - inability to process amended shipping bills electronically - eligibility of manually corrected shipping bills - Petitioner s Customs brokers inadvertently declared the Petitioner did not intend to claim the Merchandise Exports from India Scheme ( MEIS ) benefit by indicating the letter N instead of Y in the relevant digital REWARD column - seeking amendment made in three shipping bills HELD THAT - DGFT and its officials were not justified in refusing to consider the manually corrected shipping bills, particularly after the Customs Authorities allowed them to be amended by exercising their powers under Section 149 of the Customs Act. In any event, the DGFT and its officials were not justified in refusing to consider the amendments finally carried out electronically on the specious plea that the DGFT portal or the DGFT systems could not handle such situations. Artificial intelligence cannot be at the cost of mortgaging human intelligence entirely. Technology is to serve the people and not to place booby traps and make life extremely difficult for the people. It is otherwise. If there are some gaps in the existing handling systems, bona fide parties cannot be made to suffer. The human element endowed with discretion and reason must step in. The officials operating such systems, or the officials tasked with implementing the law and the Government schemes, cannot abdicate responsibility, raise their hands, deny legitimate relief or make parties run from pillar to post and ultimately the Courts to get their dues. The officials who handle technology must deal with matters with the sensitivity and intelligence that the situation requires. At no stage did we hear any argument that the Petitioner was disentitled to the MEIS scrips on merits or for any reason other than the DGFT s handling electronic systems not being tuned to accept amended shipping bills. At least after this Court s observations and directions in Technocraft Industries (India) Limited 2023 (2) TMI 74 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT the situation should have been corrected. At least after the Directorate General of Systems and Data Management (CBIC) issued Advisory No.7 of 2023, the DGFT should have aligned its systems with the advisory. This has not been done, and there is no grace to acknowledge this lacuna and sort out the matter as soon as possible. DGFT cannot adopt an attitude that its technological systems are not geared to deal with such situations and that its officials will not deal with such situations. Human and artificial intelligence must join to serve the people and achieve ease of business and not be at loggerheads. Suppose any party is entitled to any benefits under the law or under the schemes formulated by the Government to promote exports or trade. In that case, such benefits must not be denied or unduly delayed by citing technological glitches or the fact that the current electronic systems meant to assist the implementation of the law or operation of such schemes are inadequate or need revamping. What the law grants cannot be denied or unduly delayed by technology meant only to assist in implementing the law. If such an approach continues, the claims of leveraging technology to serve the people or ease of doing business will remain paper slogans. We direct the second and third Respondents to process Petitioner s application for the release of MEIS Scrips and, if the Petitioner is found eligible for the issue of such MEIS Scrips, to release the same within 15 days from today. The above exercise must be completed within 15 days from today, particularly since Customs, states that the amended shipping bill has already been electronically transmitted to the DGFT Authorities.
Issues Involved:
1. Eligibility for MEIS Scrips due to error in shipping bills. 2. Systemic inability to process amended shipping bills electronically. 3. Coordination between Customs Department and DGFT. 4. Implementation of Advisory No.7 of 2023. 5. Technological and bureaucratic challenges in leveraging technology for taxpayer service. Detailed Analysis: 1. Eligibility for MEIS Scrips due to error in shipping bills: The Petitioner sought a writ directing the Respondents to accept amendments in three shipping bills and issue MEIS Scrips amounting to Rs. 1,61,34,190.00. The error arose when the Petitioner's Customs brokers inadvertently marked "N" instead of "Y" in the REWARD column, indicating no intention to claim MEIS benefits. Despite the Petitioner being eligible for MEIS, this error led to denial of benefits. The Petitioner corrected the error manually with approval from the Customs Authorities, but the DGFT refused to process these corrections electronically. 2. Systemic inability to process amended shipping bills electronically: The Petitioner faced systemic issues as the DGFT portal was not equipped to handle manually amended shipping bills. Despite manual corrections approved by Customs, the electronic systems could not process these amendments, causing undue delay and hardship. The Petitioner's attempts to resolve this through various applications and communications with the authorities yielded no solution, highlighting a gap in the existing electronic processing systems. 3. Coordination between Customs Department and DGFT: The judgment emphasized the lack of coordination between the Customs Department and DGFT, which hindered the processing of amended shipping bills. The Court referenced a similar case, Technocraft Industries (India) Limited, where it was noted that the disconnect between these departments stifled legitimate export claims. The Court stressed the need for integration between the departments to make the MEIS policy efficient and workable. 4. Implementation of Advisory No.7 of 2023: The Directorate General of Systems and Data Management issued Advisory No.7 of 2023 to address post-EGM amendments of shipping bills under Section 149 of the Customs Act. The Advisory outlined procedures for handling such amendments and emphasized inter-departmental coordination. The Court noted that despite this Advisory, the DGFT had not updated its systems to align with the procedures, leaving the Petitioner's predicament unresolved. 5. Technological and bureaucratic challenges in leveraging technology for taxpayer service: The judgment criticized the DGFT's refusal to process manually corrected shipping bills due to technological limitations. It stressed that technology should serve the people and not create barriers. The Court highlighted the need for human intelligence to complement artificial intelligence in resolving such issues. It directed the DGFT to update its systems in line with the Court's directions and the Advisory to prevent similar issues in the future. Conclusion: The Court directed the Respondents to process the Petitioner's application for MEIS Scrips within 15 days, without using systemic or technical issues as grounds for denial. It also mandated the DGFT to update its handling systems within 60 days to comply with the Court's directions and the Advisory. Additionally, the Court ordered the second Respondent to pay Rs. 50,000 in costs to the Petitioner, to be donated to Tata Memorial (Cancer) Hospital. The judgment underscored the importance of leveraging technology effectively to facilitate ease of doing business and ensure taxpayers receive their due benefits without unnecessary legal intervention.
|