Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Law/2013-14/1678

Amendment in Shipping Bill possible if evidence substantiating change existed at the time of exports.

Case:-COMMISSIONER OF CUS. (EXPORT), NHAVA SHEVA Versus S.K. AGE EXPORTS
 
Citation:-2013 (290) .107 (Tri- Mumbai)

Brief facts:-Material facts of this case are that firstly appellant filed the condonation of delay application for condoning the delay of 118 days in filing the appeal. The delay is due to misplacement of the file and it took some time for the department to trace the file. Considering the reasons given for the delay as satisfactory, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted.
The respondent herein as M/s. S.K. Age Exports had sought amendment in shipping bill No. 2534417, dated 14-1-2004 for correcting the Advance Licence Number mentioned therein on the ground that the Advance Licence No. 0310237221, dated 19-11-2003 had been wrongly mentioned. The said advance licence had already been closed by the DGFT. The mistake had come to light during the Internal Audit. In lieu of the said advance licence, the exporter M/s. S.K. Age Exports wanted to mention Advance Licence No. 0310201208, dated 9-5-2003. Accordingly, they filed an application under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 for amendment of shipping bill. The said request was rejected by the lower adjudicating authority on the ground that necessary documentary evidence was not submitted. The respondent preferred an appeal before the lower appellate authority, who allowed their appeal. The Revenue is aggrieved of the same and preferred this appeal.
 
Appellant’s contention:- The learned Superintendent (AR) appearing for the Revenue contented the only ground that as the exporter did not submit the invoices initially at the time of claim for amendment and therefore, their claim merits rejection.
 
Respondent’s Contention:- The learned Advocate appearing for the respondent contented that under Section 149 of the Customs Act, the exporter is entitled to amend the shipping bill even after the goods have been exported on the basis of documentary evidence, which was in existence at the time the goods were cleared, deposited or exported, as the case may be. In the instant case, the Advance Licence dated 9-5-2003 and the relevant export invoices were in existence when the shipping bill was filed on 14-1-2004 vide shipping bill No. 2434417. Therefore, the respondent cannot be denied the benefit of amendment under Section 149.
 
Reasoning of Judgment:-The bench aftercarefully considering the rival submissions quoted that under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, wherein the proper officer has been given the discretion to authorize any document, after it has been presented in the Custom House to be amended. In the case of shipping bill, the amendment can be carried out even after the goods have been exported on the basis of evidence, which was in existence at the time the goods were exported. The lower appellate authority in the impugned order has given a clear and categorical finding that “in the instant case, the existence of valid Advance Licence No. 031201208, dated 9-5-2003 with the appellant in which the shipment could have been made is not under any dispute. Thus, there appears no impediment in permitting the only amendment sought in the shipping bill i.e. of amending the Advance Licence number.”. For amending the shipping bill, the only condition is that the document should have been in existence at the time the original exports were carried out. That is not disputed. Therefore, the respondent is rightly entitled for amendment of the shipping bill. Thus, Tribunal did not find any merit in the Revenue’s appeal and the same is dismissed.
 
Decision:-Appeal dismissed.
 
Comment:-The substance of this case is that section 149 of the Customs Act permits amendment in the shipping bill if the evidence supporting amendment existed at the time when the goods were exported. As the Advance License number sought to be amended existed at the shipment of goods, there was no bar in amending the same in the shipping bill. 

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com