TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 530X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the form and manner, time limit, restrictions and conditions subject to which the amendment could be allowed. In the present case, it is found that the application for amendment to shipping bills was submitted to Customs Commissionerate on 04.02.2022, prior to the introduction of these regulations. Thus, there was no specific time limit prescribed for submissions of the application for amendment under Section 149 ibid. The issue arising out of the present dispute is no more res integra in view of the judgment by the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUNDRA VERSUS M/S LYKIS LIMITED [ 2021 (2) TMI 261 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] . In the said order, it has been held that time limit cannot be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the MEIS reward, which is reflected under the head A-STATUS sub-head 5. MEIS-Y . However, due to inadvertence, while filing the details of the goods exported, the appellant had marked/ticked N (indicating No ) instead of Y (indicating yes ) under the head 28. REWARD BENEFIT in the said shipping bills.Subsequently, realizing the mistake that the shipping bill has not been properly filled up, the appellant had filed an application dated 04.02.2022 before the jurisdictional Customs authorities for post export amendment to shipping bill in terms of Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962. The application filed by the appellant was not favourably considered by the Department and the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, JNCH, Nhava Sheva ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e application for amendment to shipping bills was submitted to Customs Commissionerate on 04.02.2022, prior to the introduction of these regulations. Thus, we find that there was no specific time limit prescribed for submissions of the application for amendment under Section 149 ibid. 5. We also find that the issue arising out of the present dispute is no more res integra in view of the judgment by the Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Customs, Mundra vs. Lykis Ltd. 2021 (377) ELT 646 (Guj.). In the said order, it has been held that time limit cannot be prescribed for conversion from Drawback scheme to DFIA scheme. The relevant paragraphs in the said order are extracted herein below: - 5. In appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ard Circular No. 36/2010-Cus. We find that since the time limit has not been prescribed under the Act, the same cannot be fixed by way of the circular. Therefore, if at all there is a time limit by way of circular, it is only procedural requirement. Therefore, on this ground of limitation, application could not have been rejected, particularly when circular prescribing time limit is without authority of any statutory provision, Act and rules supported. 4.2 It is settled law that the time limit prescribed by the Board Circular is not binding as same is not statutory provision in terms of section 49 of the Customs Act, 1962. We further find that in the identical case of Bectors Food Specialities Ltd. (Supra) this Tribunal, Chandigarh af ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of Inter Continental (India) v. Union of India -2003 (154) E.L.T. 37 and the same is also upheld by the Supreme Court; 2008 SCC Online SC 22 = 2008 (226) E.L.T. 16 (S.C.). 7. In the result, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. 6. In view of the foregoing discussions, we do not find any merits in the impugned communication dated 03.03.2022, wherein the request of appellant for conversion of shipping bill was denied by the Department. Accordingly, by setting aside the communication, we allow the appeal in favour of the appellant with direction to the Department to consider the application dated 04.02.2022 for necessary amendment in the shipping bills as discussed above. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed in favour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
