HERO CYCLES LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Through the present application, the appellants have sought rectification of the mistake in the impugned final order dated 9 -2 -2004 [2004 (167) E.L.T. 25 (Tri. - Del.)] vide which their claim for conversion of the free Shipping Bill to duty Drawback bill was declined and the order -in -original was affirmed.

(2.) I have heard both the sides. The facts are not at all in dispute. The appellants cleared the goods to M/s. Evergreen Industries, Myanmar. They prepared the invoices and the shipping bills in favour of the said company and showed/indicated the name of that company, as consignee of the goods. The shipping bills were also signed by the representative of the company M/s. Evergreen Industries at the time of presentation. These facts stand proved from the certificate issued by that company that the shipping bills were presented by their representative only on behalf of the appellants M/s. Hero Industries who were the consigners of the goods and that they had only purchased the goods. The appellants in respect of those exported goods has already been received payment from M/s. Evergreen Industries, Myanmar. In these circumstances, in my view, the company M/s. Evergreen Industries could not be taken as the exporter of the goods and this mistake of holding that company as exporter is, apparent on the record and deserves to be corrected. Therefore, ROM application is allowed.

(3.) I have heard both the sides on merits of the appeal. The appellants have directed this appeal against the impugned order -in -original vide which their request for conversion of duty free shipping bill, to drawback shipping bill has been turned down.