2017 (4) TMI 834 - AT - Customs

Appeals allowed due to discrepancies in weighment, emphasizing the importance of valid documentation in import disputes

The appeals were allowed with consequential reliefs as the presiding Member concluded that the documents provided supported the appellant's claim of short ... Refund claim - according to appellant as there was short landing of goods, they had paid excess customs duty - refund rejected on the ground that the appellant has not established that the goods have short landed - Held that: - The Steamer Agent is responsible for the documents filed before the customs authorities - If the document is false, the department can issue notice or take necessary action against Steamer Agent for any false document filed before them. Even though these documents such as Annexure to the Statements of Facts and weighment certificate have been furnished before the department, as well as been subject of scrutiny at the time of adjudication, till date no action has been proposed or taken against the Steamer Agent - there is short landing of goods as stated in the weighment certificate dated 30.09.2010 - rejection of refund is unjustified - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Issues:1. Short landing of goods leading to excess customs duty payment.2. Rejection of refund claims due to lack of sufficient evidence.3. Requirement of Custodian Certificate to establish short landing of goods.4. Dispute over weighment certificate and supervision during weighment process.Analysis:1. The case involved the import of Bright Yellow Sulphur crude bulk by the appellants, with discrepancies in the quantity landed as per the Joint Draught Survey report and subsequent weighment. The appellant claimed short landing of goods, resulting in excess customs duty payment and filed refund claims. However, the original authority and Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the refund due to insufficient evidence establishing short landing.2. The appellant's counsel argued that the Joint Survey Report and Statement of Facts, signed by the Steamer Agent and Ship Master, indicated shortages in goods landed. The weighment certificates post-unloading also showed discrepancies. The authorities rejected the refund based on the absence of a Custodian Certificate corroborating the weighment certificate, despite the Port Trust Rules exempting bulk cargo from such requirements.3. The appellant contended that the weighment conducted after the out of charge order was valid, as the Statement of Facts and weighment certificates were submitted to customs authorities. The absence of a Custodian Certificate was deemed irrelevant for bulk cargo as per Port Trust Rules. The weighment certificates and statements were considered valid documents, as no action had been taken against the Steamer Agent for potential falsification.4. The presiding Member, after considering the evidence presented, concluded that the documents provided, including the weighment certificate dated 30.09.2010, supported the appellant's claim of short landing of goods. The rejection of the refund was deemed unjustified, and the appeals were allowed with consequential reliefs. The judgment highlighted the importance of valid documentation and adherence to relevant rules in customs matters.