9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1607X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r officer of Customs to direct amendment of any document, after it has been presented in Custom House. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - C/1269/2006 and Cross Objection No. C/CO/73/2007 - Final Order Nos. A/201-202/2014-WZB/C-IV(SMB) - Dated:- 26-12-2013 - Shri Anil Choudhary, Member (J) Shri Mayank Jain, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri D. Nagvenkar, Addl. Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER This appeal is directed against Order-in-Original No. 125/2006/CAC/CC/KAP, dated 4-10-2006 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (EP), Mumbai. The appellant is manufacturer of structural items and also vessels being pontoon, etc., and also exported the same. 2. The appellant manufactured and export ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e applicable, wherein it is clarified that the conversion of free shipping bills into Advance Licence/DEPB/DFRC shipping bills should not be allowed. As regards permitting conversion of shipping bills from one export promotion scheme to another, it is clarified that such conversion should only be allowed where the benefit of an export promotion scheme claimed by the exporter has been denied by the DGFT/MOC or Customs, due to any dispute. Such conversion may be permitted on merits by the Commissioner on case to case basis. 3. The appellant has made the ground that only due to clerical error the scheme was not mentioned in the shipping bill, whereas the same was mentioned on accompanying excise document in ARE-1 and he also relies on the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ein excise duty paid on inputs used in manufacture of tractors exported under DEPB scheme, the word cum-drawback inadvertently not mentioned on body of shipping bill and drawback was claimed. For the said reason appellant Mahindra Mahindra applied for amendment of shipping bill on the ground that such claim was mentioned in ARE-1, accompanying the shipping bill. The appeal was allowed by the Tribunal holding that such amendments are referred in the proviso to Section 149 of the Customs Act, as the claim was not mentioned in ARE-1, being annexed to the shipping bill, thus clearly it was stated that the goods were exported under claim of drawback. 4. The learned AR opposes the contention of the appellant stating that the mentioning of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
