2000 (3) TMI 89

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... unsigned and that therefore the bills of entry should not have been noted. It was stated that this noting was cancelled and the importer was advised to furnish bills of entry along with bills of lading duly signed by the appropriate person. The respondent filed fresh bills of entry with the signed bills of lading on 4-5-1995 and 8-5-1995. By this time the exchange rate for the Japanese yen which was the currency in which the invoice was prepared had altered to the disfavour of the importer. The Custom House applied the exchange rate prevailing on 4-5-1995 and 8-5-1995 and duty was assessed and paid. The importer filed an appeal against the letter of Assistant Collector referred to above canceling the already noted bills of entry. It also f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ulations, 1976. These regulations framed under Section 46 of the Act prescribes that bill of lading is one of the essential document to accompany the bill of entry. It is therefore implicit that the bill of lading should have accompanied the bill of entry. In the absence of that it was void ab initio. The department to whom the bill of entry was presented is not proper officer under Section 46. In view of this, an unsigned bill of lading cannot be accepted. The error in noting the bill of lading was a clerical error and therefore can be rectified under Section 154 of the Act. If the importer was aggrieved against the order of the cancellation of the noting in the bill of entry, he should have appealed. The departmental representative emphas .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ls of entry to be returned. 6. This being the case, we do not think it necessary to go into the other question as to whether subsequent cancellation of the bill of entry was required or not. 7. The departmental representative contends that the assessment has taken place not on the original sets of the bills of entry but the bills of entry subsequently filed. The exchange rate has correctly been applied in respect of these bills of entry. The answer to this argument is that the department cannot take advantage of its own wrong doing in cancellation of the bill of entry apparently filed and noted. 8. We are not able to find any support for the contention that the noting clerk to whom the bill of entry was presented was not a prope .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X