EPCG shipping bill omissions may be cured with contemporaneous records, and rejection cannot ignore supporting evidence.

For EPCG benefits, omission of the authorisation number and supporting manufacturer details in the shipping bills was not treated as fatal where the exporter could substantiate the exports through contemporaneous records. Section 149 of the Customs Act was applied to permit correction or substantiation on that basis, and the rejection was found non-speaking because it ignored the explanation and supporting material without giving an effective opportunity to prove the exports through third-party documentation. Fresh consideration of the amendment request on merits was directed after allowing production of supporting evidence.

---

---

Issues: Whether non-mention of the EPCG authorisation number and supporting manufacturer details in the shipping bills was fatal to the claim for EPCG benefit, and whether the petitioner could be given an opportunity to establish the export through contemporaneous records.

Analysis: Paragraph 5.7.1 of the Foreign Trade Policy 2009-14 requires export under EPCG to be endorsed on the shipping bills, including the authorisation number and, where relevant, the supporting manufacturer. The omission of these particulars was held not to be fatal where the petitioner seeks to substantiate the export through other material. Section 149 of the Customs Act was treated as enabling correction or substantiation on the basis of contemporaneous records. The rejection order was found to be non-speaking because it did not consider the explanation or supporting material and did not afford an effective opportunity to prove the exports through third party documentation.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to a fresh consideration of the amendment request on merits after being allowed to produce supporting evidence, and the rejection order was set aside.

---