Commissioner of Customs Vs Vishnu Barium Pvt Ltd. (CESTAT Hyderabad)
Summary: The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Regional Bench, dismissed Revenue’s appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), Guntur, which had permitted M/s Vishnu Barium Pvt Ltd. to seek amendment of 59 shipping bills under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal both on the ground of the applicable monetary limit and, alternatively, on merits.
The respondent manufactures and exports Barium Carbonate. During Financial Years 2017-18 to 2019-20, it exported goods under 59 shipping bills. While electronically filing those shipping bills, the MEIS reward option was declared as “NO”. The respondent subsequently sought amendment of the declarations from “NO” to “YES” under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, by letters dated 22.02.2021 and 08.09.2021. The request was initially rejected, and after proceedings before the Andhra Pradesh High Court and reconsideration by the Department, the Deputy Commissioner again rejected the request by Order-in-Original dated 12.01.2023. The Commissioner (Appeals), however, allowed the respondent’s appeal on 09.08.2023.
Before the Tribunal, Revenue contended that the repeated declaration of “NO” in 59 shipping bills over nearly three years could not be treated as an inadvertent omission. It argued that Section 149 confers discretion on the proper officer and that, for goods already exported, amendment must be founded upon documentary evidence existing at the time of export. Revenue also submitted that there was no contemporaneous evidence demonstrating an intention to claim MEIS benefit and relied upon Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai Vs. M/s. Dilip Kumar And Company & Ors., (2018) 9 SCC 1, Priya Blue Industries Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs, (2004) 9 SCC 433, and ITC Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, (2019) 17 SCC 46.
