Customs exemption cannot be denied for a clerical misdescription in the bill of entry when import documents prove the actual importer.

Notification benefit under Customs law cannot be denied on a merely technical misdescription in the bill of entry where the contemporaneous import documents, including the purchase order, invoice, airway bill, delivery records and payment evidence, consistently identify the sister concern as the real importer. A clerical error by the CHA in naming the respondent in the bill of entry did not override the substantive documentary record, and the exemption remained admissible because the notification conditions were otherwise satisfied.

---

---

Issues: Whether the benefit of Notification No. 39/96 could be denied merely because the bill of entry mentioned the respondent's name instead of the sister concern, when the purchase order, commercial invoice, airway bill, delivery documents and payment records showed the sister concern as the real importer.

Analysis: The imported goods were supported by documents standing in the name of M/s. Shradha Trading (India), including the purchase order, invoice, packing list, airway bill, certificate under the notification, delivery challan and payment records. The respondent and the sister concern were related concerns, and the misdescription in the bill of entry was found to be a clerical error committed by the CHA. On these facts, the mere name appearing in the bill of entry could not override the contemporaneous import documents and the true identity of the importer. Technical mistakes were not to be used to deny a benefit otherwise available under the notification.

Conclusion: The respondent was correctly treated as not being the importer for the purpose of denial of exemption, and the notification benefit could not be denied on the basis of the clerical error in the bill of entry.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue's appeal failed because the contemporaneous import documents established the sister concern as the actual importer and the notification benefit remained admissible despite the mistaken description in the bill of entry.

Ratio Decidendi: An exemption or notification benefit cannot be denied on a merely technical misdescription in the bill of entry where the contemporaneous documents conclusively establish the actual importer and the substantive conditions of the notification are otherwise satisfied.

---