9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1052X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reward option from 'No' to 'Yes' in shipping bills. 2. Since the issue involved in all the three appeals is identical, therefore, all the three appeals are being disposed of by this common order. 3. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellants had filed Shipping Bills for the export of various spice products. All the exports covered under the Shipping Bills were either under Advance Authorisation Scheme or Drawback Scheme. None of the Shipping Bills were 'Free Shipping Bills' However, inadvertently in the Shipping Bills, in the window against the query with regard to the intention of claiming the MEIS benefit, it was mentioned as 'No' instead of 'Yes'. As a result, the Shipping Bills were not electronically transmitted t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nefit in their shipping bills. In fact the appellants actually has declared the intention to claim the MEIS benefit on the face of the shipping bills in two cases viz., M/s. RBG Trading Corporation Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Universal Oleoresins but did not declare the same in the case of M/s. Kuruwa Enterprises and it was only in the Column where it was asked as to whether the shipping needs to be electronically transferred to DGFT portal, the appellants inadvertently mentioned as 'N' instead of 'Y', which is only procedural irregularity as the substantial compliance of declaration of intention is made by the appellants on the face of the shipping bill itself. He further submitted that this issue is squarely covered by the decision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase is on a higher footing then the case decided by the Delhi High Court where no declaration of intention was filed whereas in the present case, he has declared their intention to claim MEIS benefit on the front of the shipping bill which the Commissioner has ignored to notice. He further submitted that in an identical matters other ports are issuing NOC for amendment of shipping bills and he has produced on record one such NOC issued by Asst. Commissioner, Custom House, Krishnapatnam, wherein in identical facts change of reward details from 'No' to 'Yes' in the shipping bill was permitted. Learned counsel also submitted that this Tribunal in identical case vide its Final Order No.20909/2019 dated 28.10.2019, in the case of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was no declaration of intention whereas in the present case, the appellants have made the declaration on the front page of the shipping bills regarding their intention to claim the MEIS benefit except in the case of M/s. Kuruwa Enterprises. Further, I find that the other ports have allowed the amendment of shipping bill in identical situation. I also find that the issue in the present appeals are squarely covered by the decision of this Tribunal rendered in the case of M/s. N.C. John & Sons Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs, Cochin vide Final Order No.20909/2019 dated 28.10.2019 and by the judgment of the Kerala High Court in the case of Mangalath Cashews & Ors. vs. Commissioner of Customs, Cochin. In view of my discussion above, I am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
