Madras High Court
The Commissioner Of Customs vs M/S.Angel Starch And Food Pvt. Ltd on 23 June, 2022
C.M.A.No.170 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.06.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
C.M.A.No.170 of 2022
The Commissioner of Customs
O/o.The Commissioner of Customs
Custom House
Chennai IV Commissionerate
No.60 Rajaji Salai
Chennai 600 001 .. Appellant
Vs
M/s.Angel Starch and Food Pvt. Ltd.
First Floor, H-19
Periyar Nagar
Erode
Tamil Nadu 638 009 .. Respondent
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 130 of the Customs Act,
1962, to set aside the Final Order No.41639/2021 dated 01.07.2021 passed by
the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai.
For Appellant Mr.A.P.Srinivas
Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent Mr.E.Ramesh
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/5
C.M.A.No.170 of 2022
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.]
Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
2.This appeal is filed by the appellant / Revenue, challenging the order
of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT),
Chennai, formulating the following substantial questions of law:
(i)Whether the shipping bill filed under drawback can be amended to
be filed under MEIS scheme after the export of the goods and against the
mandate of Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 ?
(ii)Whether the Tribunal is correct in directing the appellant to
amend the shipping bill in violation of the DGFT Public Notice No.
09/2015-20 dated 16.05.2016 ?
3.The respondent / assessee is engaged in the business of manufacture
and export of corn starch. They had filed nine drawback shipping bills and the
same were facilitated through RMS. After coming to know that they are
eligible for MEIS scheme, the respondent made representation to the Assistant
Commissioner of Customs requesting to convert the shipping bills from
drawback to MEIS citing Board's Circular No.36/2010 dated 23.09.2010. The
Assistant Commissioner of Customs/Adjudicating Authority denied the said
request vide order-in-original dated 29.11.2018 stating that the amendment of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.170 of 2022
the shipping bills cannot be done manually as the intent of the respondent to
avail MEIS was not declared at the time of filing of shipping bills.
4.Aggrieved by the said rejection, the respondent preferred an appeal in
SEA.C.Cus II No.207/2019, before the Commissioner of Customs
(Appeals-II), Chennai, who by order-in-appeal dated 28.03.2019, set aside the
order-in-original and directed the Adjudicating Authority to consider the
amendment of the shipping bill and pass an order to that effect. On appeal by
the appellant / Revenue, the said order-in-appeal was affirmed by the
CESTAT, by holding that the benefit available in the statute cannot be denied
on the ground of technical issues. Aggrieved over the order of the Tribunal,
the appellant / Revenue has come up with this appeal before this court.
5.The issue involved herein is no longer res integra and is decided
against the Revenue, in various decisions by several High Courts. One such
decision is in the case of Bombardier Transportation India Pvt. Ltd. v.
Directorate General of Foreign Trade [2021(377) E.L.T. 489 (Guj.)], by the
Gujarat High Court, the relevant passage of which is usefully extracted below :
“18. The entitlement to MEIS benefits is governed by the Chapter-III
of the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20 (FTP 2015-20) and accordingly, the
scheme for the grant of the benefit will be governed thereunder. In other
words, the substantive rights and obligations are created by the MEIS
scheme under Chapter-III of the FTP. It also becomes apparent from para
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.170 of 2022
30.4 of the Policy that once the notified goods are exported to a notified
market, the exporter becomes entitled to the MEIS benefits. Thus,
entitlement, restriction thereof and conditions, if any, have to be found within
the letters of the Chapter-III of the FTP 2015-20. Thus, the writ-applicant
becomes entitled to the MEIS benefits once it exports the notified goods to
the notified market. This benefit cannot be defeated due to procedural
infirmity of missing to mark/tick “Y” in the rewards column.
19. It is further submitted that the issue in the present writ-
application is no longer res integra. Various High Courts including this
Hon'ble High Court have already permitted the amendment of shipping bills
that have been erroneously ticked as 'No' instead of 'Yes' in the MEIS benefit
column.”
6.In view of the above, this court is of the opinion that there is no
substantial questions of law arisen for consideration herein. Therefore, this
civil miscellaneous appeal filed by the appellant / Revenue stands dismissed.
No costs.
[R.M.D., J.] [M.S.Q., J.]
23.06.2022
Index : Yes/No
gya
To
1.The Commissioner of Customs
O/o.The Commissioner of Customs
Custom House
Chennai IV Commissionerate
No.60 Rajaji Salai
Chennai 600 001
2.The CESTAT, Chennai.
3.The Commissioner of Customs (Appeals-II)
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.A.No.170 of 2022
R.MAHADEVAN, J.
AND
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
gya
C.M.A.No.170 of 2022
23.06.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
