Export incentive claims survive shipping bill omissions when actual exports and eligibility are established, with amendment permitted.

Actual exports of fruit pulp and allied goods, being otherwise eligible under the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20, entitled the exporter to claim Merchandise Exports from India Scheme benefit. The benefit could not be denied merely because the shipping bills initially showed no claim in the reward column, especially where drawback had also been claimed and no material showed disentitlement or misuse. Shipping bill amendment was permitted to facilitate the substantive export incentive claim, and delay in seeking amendment was not treated as a bar on the facts found.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the petitioner was entitled to claim the Merchantedise Export from India Scheme benefit for the exported consignments and whether such benefit could be denied on the ground that the shipping bills were originally marked as not claiming the reward. (ii) Whether the shipping bills could be amended to enable the petitioner to claim the export incentive despite the delay in making the request.

Issue (i): Whether the petitioner was entitled to claim the Merchantedise Export from India Scheme benefit for the exported consignments and whether such benefit could be denied on the ground that the shipping bills were originally marked as not claiming the reward.

Analysis: The exports of fruit pulp and allied goods were accepted as actual exports and were goods eligible for incentive under Chapter 3 of the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20. The record showed that the petitioner had also claimed drawback, and there was no material showing that the petitioner was otherwise disentitled to export incentives. In these circumstances, the benefit of the export incentive scheme could not be denied merely because the reward column in the shipping bills had not been pressed at the time of export.

Conclusion: The petitioner was held entitled to the export incentive under the Merchantedise Export from India Scheme.

Issue (ii): Whether the shipping bills could be amended to enable the petitioner to claim the export incentive despite the delay in making the request.

Analysis: The Court accepted that shipping bill amendment may be allowed to secure the substantive benefit where the exports were in fact made and the goods were otherwise eligible. The reliance placed on the Customs circular permitting amendment under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 and the Foreign Trade Policy framework did not defeat the claim on the facts found. The delay was not treated as a bar to relief in the absence of any material showing ineligibility or misuse.

Conclusion: The shipping bills were directed to be amended to enable the petitioner to claim the export incentive.

Final Conclusion: Substantive export incentive could not be defeated by the inadvertent omission in the shipping bills, and relief was granted to facilitate the claim on the basis of actual exports and eligibility.

Ratio Decidendi: Where actual exports are established and the exporter is otherwise eligible under the governing export incentive scheme, a procedural omission in the shipping bill should not by itself defeat the substantive right to claim the benefit, and amendment may be permitted to give effect to that entitlement.

---