9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 757X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relating to export and import of goods and services. Chapter 3 deals with a Scheme for export of Merchandise from India and it also prescribes the procedure for claiming benefits under Merchandise Exports from India Scheme ['MEIS']. It is stated that, the exports made by the Petitioner are eligible for MEIS as the goods exported are covered under Appendix 3B of MEIS Schedule. iii. Computerized processing of Shipping Bills is a practise adopted under the Indian Customs Electronic Data Interchange System ['EDI System']. It is stated that, under EDI System, the shipping bills are filed electronically and processed online. It is further stated that, the Customs Authorities rely on Export General Manifest ['EGM'] as prescribed under Export Manifest (Vessels) Regulations, 1976, to certify proof of export. It is on the basis of these certifications, the exporter can claim the benefit of exports. The EGM ensures that all goods that leave India and its territorial waters are duly accounted for. After filing of EGM, the shipping bill is moved to next queue (i.e. DBK, HIST etc.) for further processing. iv. During the years 2017-2018 to 2019-2020, the Petitioner exported several consign ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 20 in order to avail benefit of MEIS; and (iii) further direct Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to facilitate the Petitioner to make application either manually or online to claim the benefit of MEIS in relation to 59 shipping bills. 3. Sri. Karan Talwar, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, mainly submits that the agent of the Petitioner has inadvertently ticked the box as "No" in the reward column of the shipping bill, in-stead of "Yes" while uploading the shipping bills on the EDI and that it was a mistake committed by its agent. He further submits that, if really the intention was not to claim benefit/reward, the 59 shipping bills, which were uploaded, would not have disclosed the reward claim. It is stated that, vide Notification, dated 16.09.2021, Respondent No.4 prescribed last date for submission of application for scrip based Foreign Trade Policy including MEIS as 31.12.2021. It is urged that, in-spite of the Petitioner approaching Respondent No. 1 in February 2021 itself for amendment of shipping bills, the same was rejected in September, 2021, without giving an opportunity of hearing. It is further contended that, applications came to be submitted manually within the time line fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , which cannot be permitted. In other words, his argument appears to be that, the Petitioner intends to claim the benefit, after export of goods to foreign country by making a false declaration, which cannot be permitted at this length of time. Since, the export is based on the option exercised; amendment at this length of time cannot be permitted. 5. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon Notification No.26/2015-20 dated 16.09.2021 [Annexure-9] to contend that at least for the period commencing from 01.07.2018, the petitioner is entitled for the relief. He also relies upon the judgment of Gujarat High Court in M/s.Mahalaxmi Rubtech Limited vs. Union of India 2021-TIOL-538-HC-AHM-CUS in support of his plea, more particularly, having regard to the fact that the said Circular No.36/2010, dated 23.09.2010, was declared as ultra vires to Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962. 6. The point that falls for consideration is, whether the request of the Petitioner, seeking amendment of shipping bills, can be accepted? 7. In order to appreciate the same, it would be appropriate to refer to the letter, dated 21.09.2021, issued by the Deputy Commissioner [Export Assessment], ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... first blush, the argument of Sri Karan Talwar, learned counsel for the petitioner that it was mistakenly ticked appeared to be impressive, for the reason that the Court proceeded on a premise that all the 59 bills were uploaded or submitted through online on the same day. But, a close perusal of the record, proved to be otherwise. The material filed along with the writ petition would disclose that these shipping bills came to be made not on a single day but on different dates. The total number of shipping bills, which are 59 in number, relate to years 2017-18 [22], 2018-19 [11] and 2019-20 [26]. The first 22 bills for the year 2017-18 came to be submitted from 13.04.2017 to 03.04.2018. The shipping bills for the years 2018-19 from 20.04.2018 to 03.04.2019 and a third set off 26 bills for the year 2019-20 from 12.04.2019 to 04.07.2019. Things would have been different, had the petitioner submitted all the 59 bills on one day and then clicked a wrong button. But, here is a case where these 59 bills were submitted online on various dates covering a period of three years. The mistake if any that has crept in could have been verified and rectified at the earliest. It is very difficult ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
