High Court of Delhi

Commissioner of Customs vs. M.D. Overseas

MANU/DE/6559/2023

26.09.2023

Customs

Amendment in the shipping bills can be allowed by the Proper Officer subject to the only rider that same is based on documentary evidence

Instant Appeals have been preferred by the Commissioner of Customs, under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 assailing the orders passed by Custom, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, whereby it allowed the amendment of documents filed with the Commissioner of Customs at the time of export of Gold Jewellery and Gold Medallions, purportedly in exercise of powers under Section 149 of the Act.

It is a common case of the parties that, the shipping bills were filed during the period 01 April 2014 to 31 March 2015 without declaration for claim of STR and the proposed amendments were sought belatedly by the Respondents on 14 March 2017.

There is no gainsaying that Section 149 of the Act has to be read in conjunction with the requirement spelt out in the Notification dated 29 June 2012. A careful perusal of Section 149 of the Act shows that firstly, it provides no period of limitation for filing of an application for amendment of relevant documents in order to seek rebate or any other benefit. Secondly, it does not provide for any reasons that may enable an exporter to claim amendments in the shipping documents. Thirdly, the proposed amendment in the shipping bills can be allowed by the Proper Officer subject to the only rider that same is based on documentary evidence that must be shown to be in existence at the time the goods were exported.

Before alluding to the Notification dated 29 June 2012, it is pertinent to mention that admittedly, the goods already stood exported from time to time and the Respondents were otherwise entitled to claim STR paid on input services, which had been prescribed at a fixed rate of 0.06% of the FOB value of exported goods falling under CTH 71 vide serial No. 162 of the schedule to the notification. Further, no dispute was raised by the appellant to the assertion/declaration by the Respondents in their request letter dated 14 March 2017 that the sales remittances had already been received on each of the export consignments as per the RBI guidelines.

Evidently, all the relevant documents containing requisite information had been duly submitted by the Respondents along with their request letters dated 14 March 2017. It is not the case of the appellant that any notice pointing out any deficiency in the documents was served by the Proper Officer upon the Respondents.

Apparently, all the relevant documents which could have been filed at the time of exports, were available as it is in original form and format without any change as such and were submitted along with the application for amendment of the shipping bills etc. on 14 March 2017. There is no legal infirmity, perversity or incorrect approach adopted by the learned CESTAT in passing the impugned orders thereby allowing the respondents the benefit of STR based on the exports made during the relevant period. Accordingly, the present appeals are dismissed.

Tags : Documents Amendment Validity

Share :