TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to claim the benefit of Notification No. 21/2022-Cus dated 13.04.2022 for the imported cotton, and whether substitution of the bills of entry from home consumption to warehousing could be permitted to secure that benefit.
Analysis: The relevant date for determination of duty on imported goods was the date of filing of the bills of entry under Section 15(1)(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The exemption notification was not in force when the bills of entry were filed and assessed, as it came into effect only from 14.04.2022. The proviso to Section 15 of the Customs Act, 1962 did not assist the appellant because the bills of entry were not presented before entry inwards of the vessel in the manner required for advance bills of entry. As to substitution under Section 46(5) of the Customs Act, 1962, permission depended on the proper officer being satisfied that revenue interests were not prejudicially affected, and the discretion was not bound to be exercised in favour of substitution where the sole object was to obtain a later exemption not existing on the filing date.
Conclusion: The appellant was not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 21/2022-Cus dated 13.04.2022, and refusal to permit substitution of the bills of entry was justified.
Ratio Decidendi: An exemption notification cannot be availed unless it is in force on the relevant date for duty determination, and substitution of a bill of entry is discretionary and may be refused where it would prejudice revenue.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
