MEIS benefit cannot be denied for an initial EDI error when documents and amendment certificate support the claim.

MEIS entitlement could not be denied merely because the shipping bills were first marked "No" in the EDI system, where the exporter's contemporaneous documents showed a consistent intention to claim the reward and a manual amendment certificate was issued under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962. The substantive export policy right prevailed over the procedural format of the Handbook of Procedure, and once amendment was allowed on the basis of existing documentary evidence, the electronic system's inability to carry out the correction could not defeat the claim. The denial of MEIS benefit on the original EDI entry was therefore not sustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether MEIS benefits could be denied solely because the shipping bills were initially marked as 'No' in the EDI system, despite documentary evidence of intent to claim the reward and a manual amendment certificate issued under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis: The entitlement to the MEIS benefit flowed from the substantive export policy framework, while the Handbook of Procedure operated as a procedural guide. The record showed that the exporter had consistently manifested its intention to claim the benefit in the shipping documents and related papers. The customs authority, after scrutiny of the contemporaneous documents, issued a manual amendment certificate under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, changing the declaration from 'No' to 'Yes'. Once that amendment was permitted on the basis of existing documentary evidence, the benefit could not be denied merely because the EDI system did not allow the correction to be carried out electronically.

Conclusion: The denial of MEIS benefit on the ground of the original EDI entry was not sustainable, and the exporter was held entitled to the benefit.

---