CESTAT overturns shipping bill amendment rejection, rules Board Circular cannot impose time limits under Section 149

CESTAT Chennai allowed the appeal against rejection of shipping bill amendment request. The lower authority had rejected the amendment application citing three-month time limit under Board Circular No. 36/2010. CESTAT held that Section 149 (prior to amendment) prescribed no specific time limit for shipping bill amendments, and the Board cannot impose such restrictions through circular. Following Bombay HC precedent in Colossustex case, the tribunal ruled that rejection based solely on the circular's time limit was unjustified and set aside the impugned order.

---

---

Issues:
The issues involved in the judgment are the rejection of the request for amendment of shipping bills on the ground of limitation.

Issue 1: Request for Amendment of Shipping Bills

The Appellant filed shipping bills for export of goods under EPCG + Drawback + ROSCTL (Scheme Code-61) but mistakenly mentioned the Code as 43. The request for amendment from Code 43 to 61 was made after three months. The Original Authority rejected the request citing a Board Circular imposing a three-month time limit for such requests. The Appellant argued that Section 149 of the Customs Act did not prescribe any time limit for such amendments during the relevant period. The Tribunal considered previous decisions and held that there was no specific time limit in Section 149 for such requests. Referring to the case of M/s. Autotech Industries (India) Pvt. Ltd., the Tribunal emphasized that a reasonable time should be allowed for such requests, and the Board Circular cannot impose a time limit. The Tribunal set aside the rejection of the request for amendment, allowing the appeal.

Decision:
The rejection of the request for amendment of shipping bills on the ground of limitation was deemed unjustified, and the impugned order was set aside. The appeal was allowed with consequential relief, if any, as per law.

---