Order Dated 29 September 2022]

Key Pointers:

• The Appellant, M/s Seco Tools India Pvt Ltd, 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 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, 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 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. 
• The Tribunal observed that the shipping bills had been filed with all particulars including the ‘advance authorisations’ in fulfilment of which the exports were intended and it was merely the absence of any reference to the said scheme of the Foreign Trade Policy in the heading of the shipping bills which, by recourse to section 149 of Customs Act, 1962, was sought to be rectified in the application of the appellants 
• In section 149 of Customs Act, 1962, it is seen that the principal provision pertains to documents that have been presented in a customs house in relation to any procedure under Customs Act, 1962. The proviso applies specifically to contents of bills of entry and shipping bills in which changes are to reflect only the documents existing at the time of clearance for home consumption/deposit in warehouse or clearance for export, as the case may be. 
• Therefore, denial by recourse to a finding other than on the specific amendment requested by an importer/exporter would be tantamount to traversing beyond the framework of statutory empowerment.
• Tribunal observed that according to the appellant, 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.
• In view of the settled position, elaborated in Haldiram Foods International Pvt Ltd, on the irrelevance of the deadline stipulated in the circular of CBEC relied upon in the impugned order, the Order rejection of the applications for amendment was set aside and direct the original authority to decide the matter afresh within the framework of section 149 of Customs Act, 1962.