2015 (12) TMI 520 - AT - Customs

Appeal to Correct Bill of Entry Dismissed under Customs Act

SAMSUNG INDIA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI

The appeal seeking correction in the Bill of Entry under Section 154 of the Customs Act, 1962, after goods clearance was dismissed. The court held that as ... Rectification of mistake - Reassessment of bill of entry - re-assessment sought after clearance of goods is not falling under Section 154 nor power is exercisable once the goods were cleared with description in the Bill of Entry - Held that:- What that is envisaged by this section is only to make effort to rectify a clerical errors or arithmetical mistakes in any decision or order passed by Central Government. When the order passed by the authority at the time of clearance remains unchallenged, re-assessment/re-determination making extensive enquiry is not subject of Section 154. Therefore, amendment sought by the appellant taking Shelter of Section 154 neither being clerical error nor arithmetical mistakes, there is no scope for grant any relief under Section 154 - Decided against assessee. Issues:1. Correction in Bill of Entry under Section 154 of Customs Act, 1962 sought after goods clearance.Analysis:The appellant sought correction in the Bill of Entry under Section 154 of the Customs Act, 1962, after the goods had already been cleared. The Adjudicating authority did not entertain the re-assessment request as the goods had crossed customs control, and the details declared in the Bill of Entry were undisputed. The order rejecting the claim was passed by the Adjudicating authority on 1-2-2009, and the Commissioner (Appeals) also upheld this decision, stating that re-assessment sought after goods clearance does not fall under Section 154. The Revenue supported this decision.Upon considering Section 154 of the Customs Act, 1962, it was noted that the section allows for rectifying clerical errors or arithmetical mistakes in decisions or orders passed by the Central Government. In this case, since the order passed at the time of clearance was unchallenged, re-assessment or re-determination involving extensive inquiry did not fall within the scope of Section 154. Therefore, the amendment sought by the appellant under Section 154 was not for clerical or arithmetical errors, and thus, no relief could be granted under this section. The appeal was dismissed, highlighting that seeking re-assessment after goods clearance through a rectification application was an abuse of the legal process, as the adjudicating authority did not have the power of review.In summary, the judgment emphasized that seeking correction in the Bill of Entry under Section 154 of the Customs Act, 1962, after goods clearance was not permissible, as the section only allows for rectifying clerical errors or arithmetical mistakes in decisions or orders. The appellant's request for re-assessment was deemed an abuse of the legal process, as the goods had already been cleared, and the details provided in the Bill of Entry were undisputed.