2024 (5) TMI 20 - AT - Customs

Tribunal Upholds Decision: Customs Appeal Dismissed Due to Jurisdiction Issues and Non-Compliance with Time Limit.

M/s Sigma Exports Versus Commissioner of Customs, NS-General, JNCH Nhava Sheva-II

The Tribunal dismissed the appellant's case, confirming the Commissioner (Appeals) lacked jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against the Administrative ... Seeking amendment of the Shipping Bills in terms of Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Jurisdiction of the First Appellate Authority - Whether decision or order passed by an officer of Customs, lower in rank than a Commissioner of Customs, can only be appealed against before the Commissioner (Appeals) and not otherwise - HELD THAT:- On perusal of the letter dated 09.06.2022 addressed by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs to the appellant, we find that though the said letter was signed by him, but the views of the Administrative Commissioner of Customs was conveyed that the request for amendment/conversion of shipping bills cannot be adhered to. Thus, we are of the considered opinion that the decision for rejection of the letter of appellant, seeking amendment of shipping bills was taken by the Commissioner of Customs and not by the officer lower in rank than him. Since, the Administrative Commissioner has communicated the view regarding non-entertainment of the application for amendment of the Shipping Bills, the order or decision passed by him cannot be appealed against before the Commissioner (Appeals) in terms of Section 128 ibid, wherein, it has been mandated that decision or order passed by an officer of Customs, lower in rank than a Commissioner of Customs, can only be appealed against before the Commissioner (Appeals) and not otherwise. Therefore, we are in agreement with the order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) that he has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal against the decision of the Administrative Commissioner. Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order, and thus dismiss the appeal filed by the appellant. Issues:The issues involved in the judgment are the amendment of Shipping Bills u/s 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 and the jurisdiction of the Commissioner (Appeals) to entertain an appeal against a decision made by the Administrative Commissioner of Customs.Amendment of Shipping Bills u/s 149:The appellant sought amendment of Shipping Bills under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962. The request for conversion of shipping bills from Customs Scheme Code 19 to 60 was rejected by the Commissioner of Customs, Nhava Sheva. The rejection was based on the time limit specified in CBIC circular No.36/2010, requiring such requests to be made within three months from the Let Export Order (LEO). The appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was dismissed on the grounds that the appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Customs is not maintainable under Section 128 of the Act. The Tribunal upheld this decision, stating that the rejection decision was made by the Commissioner of Customs, not by an officer lower in rank, and therefore the appeal was not within the jurisdiction of the Commissioner (Appeals).Jurisdiction of Commissioner (Appeals):The Tribunal examined the concept of a 'proper officer' as defined in the Customs Statute, empowered by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (CBIC) or the Commissioner of Customs. The CBIC, through Notification No. 26/2022-Cus.(N.T.), assigned powers and functions of officers of Customs to be performed by a 'proper officer.' The Tribunal clarified that officers designated in the notification, such as the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, can amend documents under Section 149 regarding goods clearance. In this case, the rejection of the amendment/conversion of shipping bills was done by the Commissioner of Customs, not the Assistant Commissioner of Customs. Therefore, the Tribunal agreed with the Commissioner (Appeals) that he lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal against the decision of the Administrative Commissioner, as mandated by Section 128 of the Act.In conclusion, the appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed by the Tribunal as it was beyond the jurisdiction of the Commissioner (Appeals) to entertain an appeal against the decision of the Administrative Commissioner of Customs.