TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 638X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , in its Final Order, considered the applicability of Section 154 and held that the provision could be invoked by the Central Government, the Board or any officer of Customs to correct its/his clerical or arithmetic mistakes in any decision or order. This Bench rightly found that the provision was not invocable by the exporter for correction of their own mistake in the Shipping Bill. This view was expressed by the Bench after a close reading of the provisions of Section 154 of the Act. The present attempt of the party is to have a different finding substituted for the above view, which is definitely beyond the scope of sub-section 2 of Section 129B of the Act - Rectification denied. - Appeal No.C/1975/2010 - - - Dated:- 1-2-2013 - Mr. P. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rror, which needs to be rectified under Section 129B(2) of the Act. 2. The learned Superintendent(AR) representing the Department (appellant in the appeal) submits that, in the EDI system, the data are furnished by the party and the same are entered in the relevant document by the Customs officer concerned. He points out that the quantity of goods furnished by the exporter and entered in the Shipping Bill was 10271 MTs. In the Check List for Export, the exporter declared that the particulars therein were true and correct. These particulars included the quantity of goods shown as 10271 MTs. Even in the challan for payment of export duty, the quantity was mentioned as 10271 MTs. Hence any mistake in the entry of quantity in the Shipping Bil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tic mistakes in any decision or order. This Bench rightly found that the provision was not invocable by the exporter for correction of their own mistake in the Shipping Bill. This view was expressed by the Bench after a close reading of the provisions of Section 154 of the Act. The present attempt of the party is to have a different finding substituted for the above view, which is definitely beyond the scope of sub-section 2 of Section 129B of the Act as rightly pointed out by the learned Superintendent(AR). Moreover, I have not found any manifest error to be rectified in the Final Order. 4. In the result, the application is dismissed. (Operative portion of this order pronounced on completion of hearing) - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Custom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
