Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Seco Tools India Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs (Export) (CESTAT Mumbai)
Appeal Number : Customs Appeal No: 86895 of 2016
Date of Judgement/Order : 29/09/2022
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Seco Tools India Pvt Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs (Export) (CESTAT Mumbai)

CESTAT Mumbai held that clear intention of export under ‘advance authorization scheme’ is evident and hence mere title of the shipping bills is to be alter. Application for alteration of the same cannot be rejected.

Facts- The dispute in this appeal of M/s Seco Tools India (P) Ltd has its genesis in a request of theirs, by letter dated 19th March 2016, for re-designating 275 nos. shipping bills, filed between 22nd September 2009 and 30th August 2011, as that of exports towards discharge of obligation against licence nos. 3110038884/17.06.2009 (112 nos.), 3110042884/15.04.2010 (108 nos.) and 3110045365/03.11.2010 (55 nos.) issued to them under ‘advance authorisation’ scheme in the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP). In the said application, preferred under section 149 of Customs Act, 1962, it was intimated that, having incorporated the details of the corresponding authorizations in the shipping bills, they had overlooked the categorization of the shipping bills at the top of the page as ‘free shipping bills’ until the export obligation had been discharged and the licencing authority (Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, Pune) had pointed this out as deficiency impending the redemption thereof.

The request was denied for not adhering to circular no. 36/2010-Customs dated 23rd September 2010 of the Central Board of Excise & Customs (CBEC) which restricted conversions only to certain classes of bills in which the subjective satisfaction intended by section 149 of Customs Act, 1962 could be elicited from documentary evidence available at the time of export and only if sought for within three months from the date of ‘let export order (LEO)’ endorsed in the shipping bills.

Conclusion- Held that the intent of the impugned exports as being in discharge of obligation under the ‘advance authorisation scheme’ of the Foreign Trade Policy is evident from the shipping bills and it is merely the title of the said bills that is stated to require alteration for enabling the appellant herein to remedy the defect pointed out by the licensing authority under the Foreign Trade Policy.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031