Tribunal rectifies duty payment error, directs re-crediting excess amount.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the re-crediting of excess duty amount debited in the DEPB passbook to the appellant. It found discrepancies in the bill of entry's gross and net weights, supporting the appellant's claim of an error in duty payment due to miscalculation. The Tribunal confirmed that the appellant had only cleared 14.4 MT of Tetrahydrofuran, not 28.8 MT as stated in the bill of entry, leading to an arithmetical error in duty payment. Relying on legal provisions for rectification of clerical errors, the decision emphasized rectifying such errors in duty payment and ensuring compliance with the law.

---

---

Issues:
1. Calculation of duty payable on imported goods
2. Assessment and re-assessment of goods cleared from customs custody
3. Rectification of arithmetical errors in duty payment

Analysis:
1. The appellant filed a Bill of Entry for the import of Tetrahydrofuran under the DEPB Scheme, paying duty on 28.8 MT instead of the actual 14.4 MT imported. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal, stating that re-assessment is not possible after goods are cleared from customs custody. The appellant argued that they only purchased 14.4 MT, not 28.8 MT, and presented evidence to support their claim. The Tribunal found discrepancies in the gross and net weights mentioned in the bill of entry, supporting the appellant's contention of an error in duty payment due to miscalculation.

2. The Tribunal examined the High Seas Sale contract and customs reports, confirming that the appellant had indeed cleared only 80 drums of Tetrahydrofuran, equivalent to 14.4 MT. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant's argument that the gross weight mentioned in the bill of entry contradicted the claimed 28.8 MT, leading to an arithmetical error in duty payment. Referring to the Customs Act, the Tribunal highlighted the possibility of rectifying such errors under Section 154, citing a previous case where a similar error was rectified.

3. Relying on legal precedents and the provision for rectification of clerical errors in duty payment, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order and directed the re-crediting of the excess duty amount debited in the DEPB passbook to the appellant. The decision emphasized the importance of rectifying arithmetical errors in duty payment and ensuring compliance with legal provisions for such corrections.

---