Legal principle

An inadvertent error in the MEIS declaration on a shipping bill, curable by amendment under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, cannot defeat a genuine exporter's reward, because errors in human institutions, whether humanly or machine handled, must be rectified in the absence of a law to the contrary.

Court decision

The Single Judge (S.R. Krishna Kumar, J.) did not himself grant the MEIS rewards or quash the email. Noting it was undisputed that the Annexure-A representation had not been considered by respondents 1-3 even till the date of the order, the Court disposed of the petition directing respondents 1-3 to address the petitioner's grievances and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after considering the documents enumerated in Annexure-A and bearing in mind Shah Nanji Nagsi (SC) and Suretex Prophylactics (Kar HC DB), within six weeks of receipt of a copy of the order.

Facts

M/s Konkan Specialty Polyproducts Pvt. Ltd., a Mangalore-based exporter (the goods themselves are not specified in the extract), obtained an NOC from Customs House, Chennai for availing MEIS scripts on a set of shipping bills and applied to the Joint DGFT, Bangalore on 25.04.2022 (Annexure-A), enclosing the shipping bills list, the Chennai Customs NOC, valid RCMC, e-Bank Realisation Certificates and bills of lading. The DGFT had earlier sent an email dated 22.01.2022 (Annexure-B) which the petitioner sought to quash. Despite the representation, respondents 1-3 took no decision on the MEIS claim, prompting the writ petition under Article 226 seeking mandamus for the MEIS rewards and certiorari against the email. The petitioner relied on Shah Nanji Nagsi Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI, (2025) 33 Centax 360 (SC), and the Karnataka Division Bench ruling in Principal Commissioner of Customs v. Suretex Prophylactics (India) Pvt. Ltd., W.A. No. 556/2022 decided 01.07.2024.

Key provisions

• Section 149, Customs Act, 1962 — Amendment of documents