Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.26 seconds)M/S. Aroma Chemical Agencies India Pvt. ... vs Commissioner Of Customs on 29 November, 2021
37. Thus, except for the fact that the request for
conversion of the free shipping bill to MEIS shipping bill
has been made beyond the time prescribed in Circular
No.36/2010Customs dated 23.09.2010, no other objection
has been raised on behalf of the respondents. In the
opinion of this court, having regard to the peculiar facts of
the present case, the omission to file 'declaration of intent'
Page 19 of 24
Downloaded on : Sun Apr 24 09:32:59 IST 2022
C/SCA/10680/2020 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 13/01/2022
when all other relevant material is available, is not fatal to
the petitioner's case. As in the case of Kedia (Agencies)
Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs (supra), in the facts
of the present case also, in all other respects, that is, as to
whether the goods conform to the description in the
shipping documents and the value, etc. continues to be
ascertainable because the concerned bills, invoices and
other shipping documents are available with the customs
authorities. The respondents are, therefore, not justified in
turning down the request to convert the shipping bills of
the petitioner from free to MEIS and thereby depriving the
petitioner of the benefits under the MEIS in respect of
exports made under such shipping bills.
M/S.Pasha International vs The Commissioner Of Customs on 10 January, 2019
As provided in case of Pasha International vs.
Commissioner of Customs (supra) by Madras High Court,
this has to be construed as pure and simple mistake
on the part of the exporter, when otherwise the
respondent has not questioned any of the shipping
bills and it is only because the declaration of
intent on the said shipping bills for claiming the
benefits under the MEIS, the subsequent claim made by
him on the EDI is questioned on the ground that Section
149 of the Customs Act would not be applicable.
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Union Of India & Ors vs Suksha International And Nutan Gems & ... on 2 January, 1989
It referred to the decision of
Saint Gobain India PVT. LTD.(supra). The respondent
was directed to issue N.O.C. to enable the
petitioner to avail the benefit and thereafter to
consider the benefit as may be available to the
petitioner expeditiously.
The Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992
Nocil Ltd. vs The Policy Relaxation Committee & Ors. on 17 July, 2017
It was further
submitted that Appendix 3B provides lists of rates of rewards on
various notified products as per ITC(HS) code wise. The Learned
Standing counsel by referring to chapter 3.14 and 3.15 of the Hand
Book of procedures, contended that there being no declaration
made by the writ applicant for intent to availed benefit of MEIS
scheme, subsequent late submission for applying for Duty Credit
scrips is rightly not entertained by the Policy Relaxation committee.
The learned Counsel further contended that the subsequent
amendment of shipping bills by the Authorised Officer,
Dahej(SEZ), shall not in any manner create any right in favour of
the writ applicant for entitlement of benefits under scheme and
neither is binding upon the Policy Relaxation Committee , as the
Committee being independent statutory authority vested with wide
and discretionary powers. The Learned Standing Counsel has
referred to Para 22, 24 and 25 of the Judgment delivered by the
Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of NOCIL LTD. Vs.
POLICY RELAXATION COMMITTEE, reported in 2018(359)
E.L.T. 31 ( Del.). It is therefore urged that what decision is taken
by the Policy Relaxation Committee is in terms of the procedure
prescribed under the Hand Book of Procedure and therefore, no
indulgence may be shown to the writ applicant.
1