9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 446X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the amendment of the importer general manifest has been necessitated because of a request from the shipper. 4. Learned Authorized Representative pointed out that respondent are shipping agents who, having filed Import General Manifest no. 18065 dated 1st April 2005, had on 11th April 2005 sought amendment of item no.49 against bill of lading no. HDMUBUBA4024049 dated 10th March 2005 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. 5. It was also informed that the competent reviewing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was the adopted weapon of choice. The objective is, doubtlessly, noble and the motive, undoubtedly, laudable. However, in the process, tolerance for genuine mistakes was eclipsed and the discretion vested in senior functionaries of Indian Customs was erased. Needless to say, even the reviewing Chief Commissioners were, thereby, debarred from applying their mind with consequential burdening of an overloaded appellate mechanism. 7. These instructions are not binding on the Tribunal and we are, hence, afforded the luxury of implementing the Customs Act, 1962. The appeal seeks to have the impugned order set aside and to have us pass such other order as deemed fit. No doubt, the Tribunal can, when circumstance so justify, set aside an impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vidence, invoking of section 111(g) for confiscation is not in accordance with law. 9. Notwithstanding the above, the inclusion of the goods in the manifest is not in dispute; Customs Act, 1962 is concerned with clearance of goods with the identity of the importer being material only upon filing of bill of entry for clearance. To the extent that the manifest was filed in accordance with the prescription under section 30 of Customs Act, 1962, and the truth thereof subscribed to on the basis of documentation on record, allegation that section 30 has been contravened will not sustain. It is on record that the bill of lading issued at load port did contain the details as entered in the manifest. Section 30 also empowers the 'proper officer' to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pse could be attributed to the agent. It must be clarified here that the person who filed the manifest is not proceeded against in its individual capacity but as the agent of the shipping line; the lapse that is to be penalised is that of the shipping line and, if it be that of the agent, is also visited upon the shipping line vicariously. 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. The adjudicati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
