Customs allows bill of entry amendment for DAP import quantities under Section 149 based on pre-clearance documentary evidence

The CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed an appeal regarding refund of excess duty paid following re-assessment of a bill of entry for amended DAP import quantities. The tribunal held that under Section 149 of the Customs Act, amendments to bills of entry are permitted based on documentary evidence existing at the time goods were cleared. Since the police report dated 15.06.2018 was available before actual goods clearance on 21.06.2018 and was submitted on 19.06.2018 prior to clearance, the amendment should have been allowed. The appeal was successful.

---

---

Issues involved:
The judgment involves issues related to re-assessment of the bill of entry and the refund arising from the re-assessment.

Re-assessment of Bill of Entry:
The case involved M/s. Indian Farmers Fertiliser Co-operative Ltd. (IFFCO) importing Di-Ammonium Phosphate (DAP), where 1800MT of DAP capsized during transfer. The dispute revolved around the amendment in the quantity of DAP imported in the Bill of Entry and the consequent refund claim for excess duty paid on the capsized quantity. The department contended that the refund claim was time-barred and denied the amendment under Section 149 of the Customs Act after the goods were cleared for home consumption. However, the appellant argued that the conditions under Section 149 were satisfied, pointing out the existence of documentary evidence at the time of clearance and timely intimation to the customs department about the loss.

Refund Claim and Re-assessment:
The appellant sought reassessment of the bill of entry under Section 149, which was rejected by the Assistant Commissioner on the grounds that no documentary evidence existed at the time of clearance for home consumption. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld this decision, emphasizing that the goods were cleared on 11.06.2018 while the destruction and police report were dated after clearance. The appellant relied on the Zuari Agro Chemical Ltd. case, highlighting the distinction between "removal" and "clearance" for home consumption, arguing that the final assessment on 21.06.2018 marked the actual clearance. The Tribunal approved this argument, stating that the police report submitted before clearance should have allowed the amendment under Section 149.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeals, emphasizing that the amendment to the bill of entry should have been permitted under Section 149 of the Customs Act. The appellant was entitled to consequential relief, and the judgment was pronounced in the open court on 04.01.2024.

---