Page 144 - ELT_1st July 2020_Vol 373_Part 1

54 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 373

20.6 Lastly, it was contended that Section 149 of the Act does not pro-
vide for any period of limitation for amending the shipping bills. It was submit-
ted that it was on account of the conduct of the respondent authorities in not de-
ciding the issue in question that there was a delay in making the application for
amendment of the shipping bills. It was, accordingly, urged that the petition de-
serves to be allowed by directing the respondents to amend the shipping bills by
permitting the same to be converted into MEIS and grant the benefits thereof.
21. Opposing the petition, Mr. Nikunt Raval, Learned Senior Standing
Counsel for respondents No. 2, 3 and 5, invited the attention of the Court to the
Foreign Trade Policy, 2015-20, whereby the MEIS came to be introduced. It was
submitted that one of the prerequisites for claiming benefits under the said
scheme in respect of Non-EDI shipping bills has been provided in para 3.14 of
the Handbook of Procedures to the Foreign Trade Policy, 2015-20, which requires
that all exporters, while filing export shipments under all categories of shipping
bills, are required to declare the following intent to claim benefit under the
MEIS : “We intend to claim rewards under Merchandise Exports from India Scheme”. It
was submitted that in case of Non-EDI shipping bills, there is no question of tick-
marking ‘Y’ or ‘N’. The exporter may either declare the intent or not.
21.1 Reference was made to Public Notice No. 40/2015-2020, dated 9-
10-2015, to submit that benefit under the said public notice is given only in cases
of EDI generated shipping bills, which require the exporters to tick mark “Y” in
case they intend to claim benefits under the MEIS and “N” in case they do not
intend to claim benefit under the MEIS. It was submitted that this is a case of
Non-EDI shipping bills and that unless there is a ‘Declaration of Intent’ on the
shipping bills, the same do not undergo any scrutiny for the grant of benefit un-
der the MEIS. It was submitted that the purport of seeking waiver of such decla-
ration on Non-EDI shipping bills would be larger as it would cover every Non-
EDI shipping bills.
21.2 Reference was made to Circular No. 36/2010-Cus., dated 23-9-
2010, which provides for conversion of free shipping bills to Advance Authorisa-
tion/DEPB/Drawback shipping bills and from one export promotion scheme to
another. It was submitted that clause (a) of para 3 thereof, specifically provides
that the request for conversion can be made by the exporter within three months
from the date of the Let Export Order (LEO). Attention was invited to para 4 of
the said circular, which provides that free shipping bills (shipping bills not filed
under any export promotion scheme) are subject to ‘nil’ examination norms.
Conversion of free shipping bills into EP scheme shipping bills (advance authori-
zation, DFIA, DEPB, reward schemes, etc.) should not be allowed. It was submit-
ted that it is in these circumstances that the ‘Declaration of Intent’ is a prerequi-
site for claiming the benefit of incentive scheme and is not procedural and that
what the petitioner seeks is the waiver of the prerequisite for obtaining the incen-
tive.
21.3 It was submitted that the precondition for filing of ‘Declaration of
Intent’ is applied on the class as a whole to Non-EDI shipping bills and that even
otherwise, the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit in respect of some of the
shipping bills, as they have been filed beyond the period of limitation. It was
submitted that if the intention to avail benefits under the scheme is not declared
in the shipping bills, the necessary process required for clearing the goods will be
missed out.

EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st July 2020  144