While dismissing the appeal filed by the Commissioner of Customs, the Delhi High Court clarified that exporters can amend their shipping bills to claim a service tax rebate (STR), even if they have not included the declaration for the claim at the time of export, provided, they have all relevant documents and there is no deficiency in the documents.

The Division Bench comprising of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Dharmesh Sharma observed that “the goods already stood exported from time to time and the respondents were otherwise entitled to claim STR paid on input services, which had been prescribed at a fixed rate of 0.06% of the FOB value of exported goods falling under CTH 71 vide serial No. 162 of the schedule to the notification. Further, no dispute was raised by the appellant to the assertion/declaration by the respondents in their request letter dated 14 March 2017 that the sales remittances had already been received on each of the export consignments as per the RBI guidelines”.

Advocate Harpreet Singh appeared for the Appellant, whereas Advocate Kishore Kunal appeared for the Respondent.

The brief facts of the case were that the respondents had filed applications under Section 149 of the Customs Act, seeking an amendment in their shipping bills that were submitted at the time of exporting gold jewellery and gold medallions. The respondents claimed that they needed to amend the shipping bills because they had not included the declaration for the claim of Service Tax Rebate, which was required as per paragraph 2 of Notification No. 41/2012-Service Tax dated June 29, 2012. The Adjudicating Authority, however, denied the amendment applications filed by the respondents, stating that amendments could only be allowed based on documentary evidence that existed at the time of export. Dissatisfied with this decision, the respondents filed appeals before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeal), but these appeals were also rejected.

Subsequently, the respondents filed second appeals, and the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) ruled in favour of the respondents, holding that applicability of Section 149 of the Customs Act related to the amendment of documents is based on the principle that all that needs to be considered is whether documentary evidence existed at the time the goods were exported.

After considering the submission, the Bench examined Section 149 of the Customs Act and noted that the section does not specify any time limit for filing an application to amend relevant documents for seeking rebates or other benefits.

Secondly, the Bench pointed that such provision does not outline any specific grounds or reasons that would enable an exporter to request amendments in shipping documents.

Thirdly, the section allows for proposed amendments in shipping bills, provided they are supported by documentary evidence that existed at the time the goods were exported, added the Bench.

The Bench found that in the present case, all the relevant documents containing requisite information had been duly submitted by the respondents along with their request letters.

It is not the case of the appellant that any notice pointing out any deficiency in the documents was served by the Proper Officer upon the respondents, added the Bench.

Apparently, the Bench elucidated that all the relevant documents that could have been filed at the time of exports were available in their original form and format without any change, and they were submitted along with the application for amendment of the shipping bills, etc.

Consequently, the High Court concluded that there was no legal infirmity, perversity, or incorrect approach adopted by the CESTAT in allowing the respondents the benefit of STR based on the exports made during the relevant period.

Cause Title: Commissioner of Customs V. M/s M.D. Overseas and Ors. [Neutral Citation: 2023: DHC: 6966-DB]

Click here to read/download the Judgment


Delhi High CourtJustice Yashwant VarmaJustice Dharmesh Sharma

Pankaj Bajpai