2017 (2) TMI 241

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he adjudicating Commissioner held that the lapse could not be attributed to respondent who, as agent for MV Royal Sutlej which transshipped the said consignment from Nhava Sheva to Mumbai, was proceeded against. It is also seen from the records that agent of the issuer of bill of lading had intimated the adjudicating authority that the revised bill of lading came into existence only after the filing of the import general manifest and, hence, they could not be held liable for error. 3. Learned Authorized Representative pointed out that respondent are shipping agents who, having filed Import General Manifest no. 18539 dated 10^th June 2005, had on 17^th June 2005 sought amendment of line no. 10 against bill of lading no. HOUACO26380 dated ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ping lines had been under instructions to ensure timely filing of manifests and, in their scramble to avoid penalties prescribed for such tardiness, complied with filing deadlines with scant attention to its correctness with deleterious impact on the possible image of Indian customs. To deter the subversion of its image improvement mission, penalty for incorrect filing was the adopted weapon of choice. The objective is, doubtlessly, noble and the motive, undoubtedly, laudable. However, in the process, tolerance for genuine mistakes was eclipsed and the discretion vested in senior functionaries of Indian Customs was erased. Needless to say, even the reviewing Chief Commissioners were, thereby, debarred from applying their mind with consequen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntravention of section 32; however, goods inadvertently unloaded but included in record kept under section 45 are not liable to confiscation. There is no doubt that goods have been unloaded, whether inadvertently or otherwise, but there is no allegation that these were not inventorised in the records of the duly appointed custodian. In the absence of any such evidence, invoking of section 111(g) for confiscation is not in accordance with law. 8. Notwithstanding the above, the inclusion of the goods in the manifest is not in dispute; Customs Act, 1962 is concerned with clearance of goods and the identity of the importer is relevant only upon filing of bill of entry for clearance. To the extent that the manifest was filed in accordance wit....