TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 677X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... officers of the Customs posted therein and they can easily verify the entire records but the same was not done in this case. The impugned order denying the amendment of the Shipping Bills is not sustainable in law - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - C/20532/2019-SM - Final Order No.20719/2019 - Dated:- 16-9-2019 - HON'BLE SHRI S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Mr. M Balagopal, Advocate For the Appellant Mr. Madhup Sharan, Asst. Commissioner (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per: S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 15.03.2019 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10, conversion can be permitted on the basis of documentary evidence which was in existence at the time when the goods were exported; that the goods were eligible for Export Promotion Scheme to which conversion has been requested and that free Shipping Bills are subject to Nil examination norms, conversion from Free Shipping Bills to Export Promotion Scheme cannot be permitted; b. That as per Circular No. 06/2002 amendment vide Circular No. 01/2009, which deals with examination norms provides that the exporters who want to claim incentives shall make their intention at the time of export itself and also provides stringent examination norms depending on the sensitivity of the destination and value of cargo. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mission, he relied upon the following decisions: V.R.A. Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs, Jamnagar, 2014 (309) ELT 100 (Tri. Ahmd.). Parle Products Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs, Nhava Sheva-II, 2017 (358) ELT 341 (Tri. Mumbai). Diamond Engineering (Chennai) P. Ltd. Vs CC, (Seaport- Export), Chennai, 2013 (288) ELT 265 (Tri. Chennai). 4.1. He further submitted that the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) that there was an unexplained delay in filing the application for amendment cannot legally sustain because there was no such allegation raised by the original authority. He further submitted that other grounds raised by both the authorities for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cies) Pvt. Ltd., 2017 (348) ELT 634 (Del.). Polydrug Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CC (General), Mumbai, 2015 (317) ELT 271 (Tri. Mumbai). Suminter India Organics Pvt. Ltd. Vs CC (Export) Nhava Sheva, Mumbai-II, 2016 (343) ELT 599 (Tri. Mumbai). 4.2. He also submitted that in identical matter, other Ports are issuing NOC for amendment of Shipping Bills and he has produced on record NOC issued by Krishnapattanam Customs in an identical matter. 5. On the other hand, Learned AR defended the impugned order. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that the appellant is working as a SEZ unit and he has expo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I find that in view of the various decisions relied upon by the appellant cited supra, amendment of Shipping Bills for the declaration of MEIS is clearly covered in favour of the assessee. Moreover, the appellant has also produced one NOC vide which amendment of Shipping Bills was allowed on identical facts. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by various decisions cited supra, I am of the considered view that the impugned order denying the amendment of the Shipping Bills is not sustainable in law and therefore I set aside the same and direct the respondent to carry out the amendment in the Shipping Bills. The appeal is accordingly allowed. (Order was pronounced in Open Court on 16/09/2019) - - TaxTMI - TMITax - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
