Page 175 - ELT_15th May 2020_VOL 372_Part 4th

2020 ] GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING COMPANY LTD. v. DEPUTY COMMR. OF CUS. IMPORT 565

10. Admittedly, the vessel was imported into the Indian waters, on
28-5-2012. At that time, no bill of entry was filed. However, the case of the peti-
tioner is this : ‘At the time of import into India, the petitioner tried to file the bill
of entry for the vessel through their agent, K. Ramabrahmam & Sons Pvt. Ltd.
The Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) submitted a letter to the 2nd re-
spondent - Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Import), on 30-5-2012, seeking
inclusion of the vessel as a separate line item in IGM so as to enable the said
agent to file a bill of entry in respect of the vessel. The said agent also filed a let-
ter, dated 31-5-2012, on 1-6-2012, stating that the line inclusion as requested in
the letter of the SAIL was not being permitted and that due to failure in the
ICEGATE system, they were not able to file a bill of entry in respect of the vessel
till the sailing of the vessel from the port, on 31-5-2012.’
11. However, according to the findings of the Assistant Commissioner
of Customs, the agent of the petitioner furnished ‘commercial invoice date’ as
‘BL date’, which was more than one year from the date of filing of the IGM and
that is the reason for the ICEGATE not accepting the line inclusion. The above
pleaded facts of the petitioner make it manifest that the petitioner is having
knowledge of requirement of inclusion of vessel in the IGM and the filing of bill
of entry for clearance of the vessel at the time of import. Thus, the petitioner is
required to include the vessel in IGM on arrival for the first time under Section
30 of the Customs Act, 1962 and has to file a bill of entry for clearance of the ves-
sel under Section 46 of the said Act and that for not doing so, a show cause notice
was issued and later the order, dated 6-7-2018, came to be passed imposing pen-
alties of Rs. 25,000/- under Section 30 and Rs. 60,000/- under Section 17 (in the
absence of specific penal provision for contravention of Section 46) of the Cus-
toms Act, 1962. No doubt, the penalties were deposited. The order imposing
penalties itself stated that the said order is issued without prejudice to any other
action as may be initiated, pending against the importers under any other provi-
sion of the Customs Act, 1962 or any other law for the time being in force. In fact
the petitioner filed a manual bill of entry, on 10-7-2018, having deposited the
penalties in a total sum of Rs. 85,000/-, on 9-7-2018, by way of a demand draft.
The petitioner contends on one hand that the said manual bill of entry is filed for
procedural regularisation of import of the vessel. On the other, the petitioner also
contends that there is no requirement of filing of manual bill of entry on the said
date as the order imposing penalty was accepted and penalty was deposited and
the said order has become final and the importation is regularised on payment of
penalty. The petitioner also submits that a request was made for withdrawal of
the manual bill of entry. The petitioner further contends as follows :- ‘If the cus-
toms authorities want to undertake the assessment/reassessment in 2018 as sug-
gested in the letter, dated 19-9-2018 and not as on 28-5-2012, as requested in the
manual bill of entry, the petitioner is then withdrawing the manual bill of entry
so filed.’ The legal obligation to file a bill of entry even if the vessel on its import
into Indian waters was exempt from duty is not in dispute. The penalties were
imposed under Sections 30 and 46 of the Customs Act. Section 30 of the said Act
casts an obligation to make a declaration, which is an intimation about the arrival
of the vessel. The prescribed form in this regard is the Import General Manifest
(IGM). Section 46 of the Customs Act reads as under :

EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th May 2020  175