The Principal Commissioner Of Customs, Mundra Vs LYKIS Limited (Gujarat High Court)
From the above Section, it is clear that no time limit is prescribed. We find that the request of the appellant for conversion was rejected on the sole ground of limitation as prescribed under Board Circular No. 36/2010 Cus. We find that since the time limit has not been prescribed under the act, the same cannot be fixed by way of the circular. Therefore, if at all there is a time limit by way of circular, it is only procedural requirement. Therefore, on this ground of limitation, application could not have been rejected, particularly when circular prescribing time limit is without authority of any statutory provision, act and rules supported.
It is settled law that the time limit prescribed by the Board Circular is not binding as same is not statutory provision in terms of section 49 of the Customs Act 1962. We further find that in the identical case of Bectors Food Specialities Ltd. (Supra) this Tribunal, Chandigarh after considering the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court judgment in the case of Anil Sharma Vs. Union of India – 2017 (350) ELT 322 (Guj.) held that the assessee was entitled for conversion of shipping bill from DBK Scheme to DFIA Scheme. We after going through the said decision find that the circumstances and reason for delay in filing request for conversion was almost identical in the present case. In the case cited of coordinate Bench of this Tribunal Mumbai dealing with the identical issue in the case of Parley Product Pvt. Ltd (Supra) on the fact that the conversion of drawback shipping bill to DFIA shipping bill was after 2 years, wherein it was held that no time limit provided under section 149 of Customs Act, 1962.
