Tribunal orders Customs to allow amendments to shipping bills under Customs Act

The Tribunal held that the rejection of the appellant's request to amend shipping bills under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, was unjustified. It set aside the decision of the customs authorities and directed the Commissioner to process the requested amendments. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of a liberal approach in permitting amendments to support export promotion schemes, highlighting the facilitative nature of Section 149. The ruling was issued on 07/12/2022.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Rejection of request for amendment of shipping bills under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962.
2. Applicability of time limitation for amendment requests.
3. Requirement of physical examination of goods for eligibility under the EPCG-cum-DFIA scheme.
4. Jurisdiction and authority of customs officials in deciding eligibility for amendments.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Rejection of Request for Amendment of Shipping Bills:
The appellant, M/s Posco Maharashtra Steel Pvt Ltd, sought to amend 230 shipping bills filed between July 2017 and May 2019 under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962. The request was rejected by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Export Assessment), New Customs House Mumbai, citing the bar of limitation and the non-availability of goods for physical examination. The appellant contended that there is no time limitation under Section 149 and referenced previous Tribunal decisions and a High Court ruling that supported their stance.

2. Applicability of Time Limitation for Amendment Requests:
The Tribunal noted that Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, does not prescribe any time limitation for amendments. The Tribunal referenced previous decisions, including Parle Products P Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs and Lykis Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs, which held that the absence of any limitation in Section 149 precludes consideration of a timeframe in disposing of amendment applications. The Tribunal also cited the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat's decision in Mahalaxmi Rubtech Ltd v. Union of India, which declared paragraph 3(a) in circular no. 36/2010-Cus dated 23rd September 2010 to be ultra vires Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962.

3. Requirement of Physical Examination of Goods:
The Tribunal examined the requirement for physical examination of goods as a pre-requisite for eligibility under the EPCG-cum-DFIA scheme. The Tribunal found that the impugned order's reliance on the need for physical examination was misplaced, as the amendments sought did not involve altering the description of the exports. The Tribunal emphasized that amendments under Section 149 do not necessarily require verification of documentary evidence if the goods have already been exported and cleared without objection.

4. Jurisdiction and Authority of Customs Officials:
The Tribunal addressed the jurisdictional overreach by customs officials in deciding eligibility for amendments under the EPCG-cum-DFIA scheme. The Tribunal highlighted that the authority to scrutinize eligibility and issue instruments under the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) lies with the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT), not the customs authorities. The Tribunal found that the customs officials' decision to reject the amendment request based on eligibility considerations was beyond their jurisdiction and premature.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal concluded that the rejection of the amendment request by the customs authorities was not justified. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and directed the respondent-Commissioner to effect the amendments in the shipping bills as sought by the appellant. The Tribunal emphasized the facilitative intent of Section 149 and the need for a liberal approach in allowing amendments to support export promotion schemes. The order was pronounced in the open court on 07/12/2022.

---