The Petitioner, situated in a Special Economic Zone in Mumbai, had been exporting electronic motors to notified markets and claiming benefit under the MEIS in the prescribed manner. In certain cases, where exports had been made from non-EDI portals, physical SBs were filed and physical MEIS applications had been filed. Such applications made by the Petitioner, were rejected on the ground that the declaration of intent on the SB had not been mentioned.
Aggrieved, the Petitioner had preferred a Writ before the Bombay HC. The HC observed that in the case of non-EDI cases, under the provisions of section 149 of the Customs Act, only manual corrections can be made by a party. It was further observed that the only lapse on the part of the Petitioner was that it had inadvertently mentioned ‘N’ in the reward column of the SB instead of ‘Y’.
It was observed by the HC that such an error is a procedural defect and is curable considering the fundamental objective of the scheme under Chapter 3 of the FTP 2015-20. The basic objective of the Exports from India Schemes is to provide reward to the exporters and to promote manufacture and export of notified goods to notified markets. Once this is done, the assessees are entitled to claim its reward.
The HC further observed that in the case of Pasha International vs. Commissioner of Customs [2019 (365) E.L.T. 669], among others, it has been held by the Madras HC that an assessee can be allowed to manually carry out corrections in the SBs in the case of Non-EDI bills and the Revenue can issue the necessary No-Objection Certificate to such party if such assessee has inadvertently committed a mistake while filing and uploading the SB and not claimed MEIS benefit.
Basis the above observations, the Bombay HC quashed the MEIS rejection letters and directed the Revenue to issue the required No Objection Certificate, basis which the Petitioner would be enabled to claim the benefit of MEIS.
Portescap India Private Limited vs. Union of India and Ors. [W.P. No. 2532 of 2019]
Disclaimer:
The information provided in this update is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal opinion or advice. Readers are requested to seek formal legal advice prior to acting upon any of the information provided herein. This update is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or corporate body. There can be no assurance that the judicial/ quasi judicial authorities may not take a position contrary to the views mentioned hereinrra quis.
Sign up for the Newsletter