TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Duty for imported goods fixed by original Bill of Entry date, ignoring later ownership changes under customs law</h1> <h3>Viterra India Private Ltd. Versus Union Of India & Ors.</h3> Viterra India Private Ltd. Versus Union Of India & Ors. - 2025:GUJHC:43987 - DB ISSUES: Whether cancellation of Bills of Entry for imported goods is permissible for the purpose of amending the Import General Manifest (IGM) to reflect a change in the importer's name.Whether the amendment of IGM and Bills of Entry to substitute the name of a new importer constitutes a 'major amendment' requiring adjudication or can be permitted without such.The applicable date for determination of customs duty rate where ownership of imported goods changes after the original Bill of Entry for home consumption has been filed.Whether the new importer is entitled to clearance of goods at the customs duty rate prevailing on the original Bill of Entry filing date despite filing a fresh Bill of Entry subsequently.Whether principles of natural justice were violated by cancellation of Bills of Entry without notice to interested parties. RULINGS / HOLDINGS: The cancellation of Bills of Entry dated 20.06.2017 by the customs authorities was held to be 'perverse and not in accordance with the provisions of Customs Act' and violated principles of natural justice by not informing the interested parties.Amendment of the IGM to substitute the name of the importer is not a 'major amendment' requiring adjudication if there is no fraudulent intention; such amendment should be permitted without cancellation of Bills of Entry.Under Section 15(1)(a) of the Customs Act, the applicable rate of duty on imported goods entered for home consumption is the rate 'in force on the date on which a bill of entry in respect of such goods is presented.'The rate of duty applicable to the goods is determined by the date of presentation of the original Bill of Entry (20.06.2017), notwithstanding that the ownership changed thereafter and a fresh Bill of Entry was filed by the new importer.The new importer qualifies as an 'importer' under Section 2(26) of the Customs Act, and is entitled to have their name substituted in the Bills of Entry and IGM, but this does not affect the duty rate applicable as per the original Bill of Entry date.The petition to quash the cancellation of the original Bills of Entry and to apply the customs duty rate as on the original import date was allowed. RATIONALE: The Court applied the statutory framework under the Customs Act, 1962, particularly Sections 2(26), 15, and 46, which govern the definition of importer, determination of rate of duty, and filing of Bills of Entry for home consumption respectively.Section 15(1)(a) explicitly fixes the customs duty rate based on the date the Bill of Entry for home consumption is presented, not on subsequent changes in ownership or re-filing of Bills of Entry.Section 2(26)'s broad definition of 'importer' includes any owner of goods between importation and clearance for home consumption, allowing substitution of importer name without affecting duty liability.Precedent from a prior High Court decision was relied upon to affirm that change in ownership post-presentation of Bill of Entry does not alter the applicable rate of duty.Customs Circular No. 45/2005 was noted to permit amendments to IGM where there is no fraudulent intention, and cancellation of Bills of Entry is not mandated for such amendments.The Court emphasized adherence to principles of natural justice, requiring notice to interested parties before cancellation of Bills of Entry.No doctrinal shift or dissent was noted; the Court followed established statutory interpretation and precedent.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
