2021 (7) TMI 660

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Ramesh, Adv. for the Respondent ORDER The above appeal is filed by the department against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), who allowed the amendment of shipping bill. On behalf of the appellant, the learned Authorised Representative Shri S. Balakumar appeared and argued the matter. He submitted that the appellant had filed draw-back shipping bills and, thereafter, requested for a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ndment cannot be allowed. He prayed that the impugned order may be set aside. 2. The learned counsel Shri E. Ramesh appeared and argued the matter for the respondent. He submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) has correctly discussed in detail with regard to the amendment claimed by the appellant. It is not the case of the department that the appellant is not eligible for MEIS benefit. Further, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... llowed on satisfaction by the proper office that the request made is genuine. The appellant has requested for amendment to include MEIS benefit. The department does not have a case that the appellant is not eligible for MEIS benefit claimed by them. The appeal has been filed by department stating flimsy grounds that the department would not be able to retrieve the shipping bill so as to check and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X