9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 356X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rport Authority of India. In this case, the amendment sought for is based on the documents that were available before the import. Since the imported lost goods were never cleared, the petitioner was entitled to have the subject Bill of Entry amended for the purpose of refund under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 subject to other safeguards under Section 27 of the Customs Act,1962. Further, to have the refund processed, the Bill of Entry has to be re-assessed - Petition allowed. - W.P.No.27 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 11-2-2021 - Honourable Mr.Justice C.Saravanan For the Petitioner : M/s.S.Derrick Sam and G.Vijayabalan For the Respondents : Mr.P.Rajkumar Jhabakh ORDER This writ petition has been filed seeking ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the Airports Authority of India found that there were two packages at the time of the import that one pallet was missing due to theft within the Air Cargo Complex in Chennai Airport. The survey report reported the value of the missing pallet as ₹ 16,48,920/-. 7. The petitioner sent a letter dated 24.02.2016 to the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Air Cargo) to re-assess the Bill of Entry in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s.Priya Blue Industries vs. Commissioner of Customs, 2004 (172) ELT 145 (SC). 8. It is submitted that despite several remainders, there was no response from the 1st respondent. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. 9. It is submitted that under Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applies only if any imported goods are pilfered after the unloading thereof and before the proper officer has been made an order for clearance for home consumption or deposit in a warehouse. 14. It is submitted that in this case, the imported goods were assessed for customs duty and was passed for being cleared and therefore Section 13 of the Customs Act, 1962 was not applicable. Therefore, the petitioner was liable to pay Customs Duty. Consequently, there is no question of refunding of the duty. 15. The learned counsel for the respondents cited on the decision of the Tribunal in Commissioner of Customs (Air Cargo), New Delhi vs. Relaxo Rubber Ltd., 2001(ELT) 797 (Tri) to persuade the court to conclude duty was payable and ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty under Section 13 of the Customs Act, 1962, if the imported goods were pilfered after unloading but being ordered to be cleared for Home Consumption or is ordered to be deposited in the warehouse, except where the pilfered goods are restored to the importer after pilferage. 22. Similarly, under Section 23 of the Customs Act, 1962, an imported is entitled for remission of duty the imported goods, if imported goods are lost, destroyed or abandoned otherwise than on as a result of pilferage, at any time, before the clearance of the goods for home consumption. Remission of duty would apply before payment of duty. The expression pilferage has not been defined in the Act. The dictionary meaning of the word pilferage means an act or practic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
