Application for conversion of Shipping bill from one scheme to another – cannot be rejected without giving sufficient reasons for doing so.

PJ/Case Laws/2010-11/1095

Case: JSW Steel Ltd v/s Commissioner of Customs, Visakhapatnam

Citation: 2011 (264) ELT 267 (Tri-Bang)

Issue: - Application for conversion of Shipping bill from one scheme to another – cannot be rejected without giving sufficient reasons for doing so.

Brief Facts: - The appellant had exported 7 consignments of Non-alloy steel slabs claiming benefit under EPCG & DEPB scheme. The benefit of DEPB was withdrawn from the goods exported.

The appellant applied to the Commissioner for amendment of the Shipping Bills claiming EPCG & DFIA benefits. The Commissioner vide letter dated 13.10.2009 rejected the request for conversion of Shipping bill without assigning any reasons.

Against the impugned letter, appellant has filed an appeal in the Tribunal.

Appellant’s Contention:- Appellant submitted that in terms of Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 the appellants had a statutory right to seek amendment of the shipping bills on the basis of documentary evidence that existed at the time of export of their goods. It was submitted that as per the relevant Foreign Trade Policy 2004-2009 Para 2.56 of the Handbook of Procedures any scheme could be converted into any other scheme so long as the benefit of that scheme in the EP copy had not been availed.

Appellant submitted that they could not obtain benefit of DEPB scheme because DGFT had withdrawn the DEPB scheme in respect of Steel Slabs under Public Notice No. 130(RE-2007)/2007-09 dated 27.03.2008.

Appellant relied upon the decision given in Metallic Bellows (I) Pvt Ltd v/s CC, Nhava Sheva [2008 (228) ELT 479 (Tri-Mum)] and in Sologuard Medical Devices Pvt Ltd v/s CC (Seaport), Chennai [2007 (216) ELT 62 (Tri-Chennai)].

It was further stated that the exports satisfied the requirements to qualify for the benefit of EPCG and DFIA schemes and as per Section 149 of the Customs Act, the shipping bills could be amended on the basis of documentary evidence that existed at the time of filing of shipping bills. It was submitted that the DFIA dated 13.06.2008 and 02.07.2008 were due to expire on 12.12.2010 and 01.01.2011 respectively. It was submitted that the Commissioner had given a cryptic and non-speaking communication to them rejecting their claim.

Respondent’s Contention:- Revenue contended that conversion of shipping bills from one export scheme to another was subject to conditions prescribed in Circular No. 4/2004-Cus dated 16.01.2004. Reference was made to the conditions enumerated therein and submitted that subject to these conditions, the Commissioner could examine the request of the exporter on a case to case basis.

Reasoning of Judgment:- The Tribunal held that that the conversion application was denied without communicating any reasons therefor. The Commissioner is competent to allow the amendment sought by the appellants. Appellant were entitled to the relief sought in terms of provisions of Section 149. The Tribunal remanded the matter to the Commissioner as the application was not disposed of by a speaking order.

Decision:- Appeal disposed of by way of remand.

************

Comments

PJ/Case Laws/2010-11/1095

Post a Comment

Query