Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 446 - AT - CustomsAmendment in bill of lading - amendment made in bill of lading to substitute M/s Ratnamani Metals and Tubes Ltd, Ahmedabad as consignee in lieu of M/s Kirtanlal & Sons - the charge against the respondent is that the manifest had not made any reference to M/s Ratnamani Metals and Tubes Ltd, Ahmedabad and the goods had been off-loaded in India without being manifested - Held that: - There is no doubt that goods have been unloaded, whether inadvertently or otherwise, but there is no allegation that these were not inventorised in the records of the duly appointed custodian. In the absence of any such evidence, invoking of section 111(g) for confiscation is not in accordance with law. the respondent had informed the adjudicating authority that the revision in bill of lading was made after the filing of the manifest and, therefore, no lapse could be attributed to the agent - It must also be noted that amendments in bills of lading, being documents of title, are to be made only on the original bill of lading; multiple versions of documents of title are unheard of. It is also a document of custodianship and a shipping line cannot issue a bill with a later date owing to implications of responsibility for safe delivery of cargo being alienated for the inter regnum - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
|