Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2021 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (12) TMI 296 - HC - CustomsLevy of late fee charges - provision for purging the Bill of Entry either under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 or under the Provisions of aforesaid Regulations - validity of second Bill of Entry - Section 46 of the Customs Act, 1961 - HELD THAT:- Regulation 4 of the Bill of Entry (Electronic Integrated Declaration and Paperless Procession) Regulations, 2018 has been framed to implement Section 46(3) of the Customs Act, 1962. The practice of purging of Bill of Entry appears to be based on the practice adopted in various ports on account of the architecture of the ICEGATE. There is however no provision either under the Customs Act, 1962 or under the provisions of Regulation which contemplates purging of the Bill of Entry. In the facts of the case, the petitioner has filed a second Bill of Entry on 12.07.2021 and said the necessity for filing second Bill of Entry arose only on account of the fact that the earlier Bill of Entry dated 20.04.2021 got erased in the ICEGATE or the customs system. Therefore, the petitioner could not comply with the requirements regarding the query raised on 20.04.2021. It cannot be ignored that the entire world was under the second wave of Covid – 19 lockdowns were being imposed to protect the humanity from the throes of death. India was no exception, only few essential services were allowed to operate. In fact, the expression purging is neither found in the Act nor in the aforesaid Regulation. Therefore, question of imposing late fee chargers merely because an importer files a second Bill of Entry on account of the factors mentioned above would not justify the levy of late fee charges on the petitioner. Further it is noticed that in the impugned communication dated 12.07.2021 an amount of ₹ 8,25,000/- was being demanded as a fine amount and not a late fee in terms of Regulation 4(3) of the Bill of Entry (Electronic Integrated Declaration and Paperless Processing) Regulations, 2018 and Section 46(3) of the Act. This is also clearly contrary to the scheme of the Customs Act, 1962 and Bill of Entry (Electronic Integrated Declaration and Paperless Processing) Regulations, 2018. This writ petition is allowed by quashing the impugned order seeking to levy fine late fee on the petitioner under the provisions of Regulation 4(3) of the Act and Section 46(3) of the Act. The respondents are directed to release the goods which are lying under their control immediately subject to the petitioner paying the requisite Customs duty and the applicable taxes within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
|