Disposed

Kitex Childrenswear Ltd., v. Union of India

Kerala HC15 Jul 2024WP(C)/6685/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala directed the 5th respondent to permit Kitex Garments Ltd. to file an application for amendment of shipping bill documents to cure mistakes causing denial of rebate under the State and Central Taxes Scheme. The petitioners were ordered to file such an application within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 5th respondent to consider an application filed by the petitioners within two weeks for amending documents and permitting necessary corrections to the rebate claim.

Kitex Childrenswear Ltd., Vs Union of India — Banking and Recovery | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶4

MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 24TH ASHADHA, 1946

¶5

WP(C) NO. 6650 OF 2024

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

KITEX GARMENTS LTD,
P.B. NO. 5, KIZHAKKAMBALAM, ALUVA, COCHIN,
REPRESENTED BY MR. MANOJ. T.P., AGM - FINANCE &
ACCOUNTS, PIN – 683562.
BY ADVS.
P.R.VENKATESH
ASHA P.KURIAKOSE
LAKSHMI MEENAKSHI P.R.

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE (DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE), 14, HUDCO VISHALA BLDG, B WING, 6TH FLOOR, BHIKAJI CAMA PLACE, NEW DELHI, PIN – 110066.

¶10

2 CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES & CUSTOMS, DRAWBACK DIVISION, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 14, HUDCO VISHALA BLDG, B WING, 6TH FLOOR, BHIKAJI CAMA PLACE, NEW DELHI, PIN – 110066.

¶11

3 COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (APPEALS) , CUSTOMS HOUSE, COCHIN, PIN – 682009.

¶12

4 PRINCIPAL DIRECTOR GENERAL, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF SYSTEMS AND DATA MANAGEMENT, INDIRECT TAX & CUSTOMS, 4TH & 5TH FLOOR, HOTEL SAMRAT, CHANAKYAPURI, NEW DELHI, PIN – 110021.

¶13

5 DY. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (DRAWBACK), OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CUSTOMS HOUSE, WILLINGDON ISLAND, COCHIN, PIN – 682009.

¶14

BY ADV P.G.JAYASHANKAR

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.07.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).6685/2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C) NOS. 6650 & 6685 OF 2024 2

¶17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶18

PRESENT

¶19

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 24TH ASHADHA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 6685 OF 2024

¶20

PETITIONER:

¶21

KITEX CHILDRENSWEAR LTD.,

¶22

P.B. NO. 5, KIZHAKKAMBALAM, ALUVA, COCHIN, REPRESENTED
BY MR. THOMAS CHERIAN, DIRECTOR (SOURCING),
PIN – 683562.

¶23

BY ADVS.
P.R.VENKATESH
ASHA P.KURIAKOSE
LAKSHMI MEENAKSHI P.R.

¶24

RESPONDENTS:

¶25

1 UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE (DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE), 14, HUDCO VISHALA BLDG, B WING, 6TH FLOOR, BHIKAJI CAMA PLACE, NEW DELHI, PIN – 110066.

¶26

2 CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES & CUSTOMS, DRAWBACK DIVISION, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 14, HUDCO VISHALA BLDG, B WING, 6TH FLOOR, BHIKAJI CAMA PLACE, NEW DELHI. REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, PIN – 110066.

¶27

3 COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (APPEALS), CUSTOMS HOUSE, COCHIN, PIN – 682009.

¶28

4 PRINCIPAL DIRECTOR GENERAL, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF SYSTEMS AND DATA MANAGEMENT, INDIRECT TAX & CUSTOMS, 4TH & 5TH FLOOR, HOTEL SAMRAT, CHANAKYAPURI, NEW DELHI, PIN – 110021.

¶29

5 DY. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (DRAWBACK) , OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CUSTOMS HOUSE, WILLINGDON ISLAND, COCHIN, PIN – 682009.

¶30

BY ADV P.G.JAYASHANKAR

¶31

WP(C) NOS. 6650 & 6685 OF 2024 3

¶32

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.07.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).6650/2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶33

WP(C) NOS. 6650 & 6685 OF 2024 4

¶34

JUDGMENT

¶35

[WP(C) Nos.6650/2024, 6685/2024]

¶36

The petitioners have been denied the benefit of the ‘Rebate of State and Central Taxes and Levies Scheme’ (the Scheme) in respect of certain shipping bills filed by them during the period from 1.1.2021 to 30.9.2021. It is clear from the statement filed by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 5^th respondent in both the cases and the submissions made across the Bar that the denial of the benefit was on account of some mistakes committed by the petitioners while making a claim for the benefits under the Scheme through the on-line mode.

¶37

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners relies on the judgment of this Court in W.P.(C) No.27126 of 2019 and connected case to contend that mistakes committed by the exporter cannot be a ground to deny genuine claims under the Scheme. It is submitted that this Court in the aforesaid judgment has directed the consideration of the claim (in that case) by permitting the applicants to make a fresh application after curing defects, if any. It is submitted that the provisions of Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 also permits the amendment of shipping bills and therefore the petitioners in these cases may be permitted to make suitable amendments to the documents already filed.

¶38

WP(C) NOS. 6650 & 6685 OF 2024 5

¶39

The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent – Department would submit that on the basis of directions issued by this Court, instructions were obtained from the Director General (Systems) of the respondent – Department and it has been confirmed that the claim in respect of the shipping bills in question has been denied on account of a mistake by the petitioners while uploading the documents for claiming the benefit of the Scheme.

¶40

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent – Department, this writ petition will stand disposed of directing that if the petitioners file an application for amendment of the documents already filed before the 5^th respondent, the said respondent shall consider the same and permit the necessary corrections. If the 5^th respondent is not the competent authority, he shall forward any application made by the petitioners to the competent authority who shall permit the petitioners to make necessary corrections. After the petitioners are permitted to make necessary corrections, the claim in respect of the shipping bills in question shall be considered in accordance with the law. If the petitioners file a request for correction before the 5^th respondent as directed above within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, the 5^th

¶41

WP(C) NOS. 6650 & 6685 OF 2024 6

¶42

respondent or the competent authority shall consider and dispose of such claim without further delay and at any rate, within two months from the date of the application, in terms of the provisions of the Scheme.

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

GOPINATH P.

¶45

 JUDGE

¶46

Sru

¶47

WP(C) NOS. 6650 & 6685 OF 2024 7

¶48

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6685/2024

¶49

`PETITIO`	`NER’S EXHIBITS`
`Exhibit`	`P1` `TRUE`	`COPY`	`OF`	`THE`	`LET`	`TER REFERRING CIRCULAR`
	`NO.` `PETIT`	`22/20` `IONER`	`21` `.`	`-CUS`	`SEN`	`T ON 30.09.2021 BY`
`Exhibit`	`P2` `TRUE` `30.09`	`COPY` `.2021`	`OF` `IS`	`THE` `SUED`	`ADVI` `BY T`	`SORY NO. 23/2021 DATED` `HE 4TH RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit`	`P3` `TRUE` `SUBMI`	`COPY` `TTED`	`OF` `BY`	`THE` `THE P`	`CO` `ETIT`	`MPLAINT DATED 7.9.2022` `IONER.`
`Exhibit`	`P4` `TRUE` `DATED`	`COPY` `NIL.`	`OF`	`REP`	`LY S`	`ENT TO THE PETITIONER`
`Exhibit`	`P5` `TRUE` `SHARI`	`COPY` `NG TH`	`OF` `E D`	`THE` `ETAIL`	`COMMU` `S IN`	`NICATION DATED 1.8.2022` `EXCEL FORMAT.`
`Exhibit`	`P6` `TRUE` `RAISE`	`COPY` `D BY`	`OF` `THE`	`THE` `PETI`	`COMP` `TION`	`LAINT DATED 30.12.2022` `ER.`
`Exhibit`	`P7` `TRUE` `29.9.`	`COPY` `2021.`	`OF`	`SHIP`	`PING`	`BILL NO. 4962563 DATED`
`Exhibit`	`P8` `TRUE` `DATED`	`COPY` `14.9`	`OF` `.20`	`THE` `21.`	`SHI`	`PPING BILL NO. 4583726`
`Exhibit`	`P9` `TRUE` `7.2.2` `3RD R`	`COPY` `023 S` `ESPON`	`UBM` `DEN`	`OF` `ITTE` `T.`	`THE` `D BY`	`REPRESENTATION DATED` `THE PETITIONER TO THE`
`Exhibit`	`P10` `TRUE` `11.2.`	`COPY` `2023.`		`OF`	`THE`	`REPRESENTATION DATED`
`Exhibit`	`P11` `True` `31.12`	`copy` `.2020`	`.`	`of A`	`dvis`	`ory No. 50/20 dated`
`Exhibit`	`P12` `True` `W.P.(`	`copy` `C) No`	`of` `. 2`	`the` `5339/`	`judgm` `2019`	`ent dated 13.11.2019 in` `.`

¶50

WP(C) NOS. 6650 & 6685 OF 2024 8

¶51

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6650/2024

¶52

`PETITIO`	`NER’S EXHI`	`BITS`
`Exhibit`	`P1`	`TRUE` `DATED` `RESPO`	`COPY` `30` `NDENT`	`OF` `.09` `.`	`THE` `.202`	`CIR` `1 I`	`CULAR NO. 22/2021-CUS` `SSUED BY THE 2ND`
`Exhibit`	`P2`	`TRUE` `30.09`	`COPY` `.2021`	`OF` `IS`	`THE` `SUED`	`ADVI` `BY T`	`SORY NO. 23/2021 DATED` `HE 4TH RESPONDENT.`
`Exhibit`	`P3`	`TRUE` `SUBMI`	`COPY` `TTED`	`OF` `BY`	`THE` `THE P`	`COM` `ETIT`	`PLAINT DATED 30.7.2022` `IONER.`
`Exhibit`	`P4`	`TRUE`	`COPY`	`OF`	`REPLY`	`SEN`	`T TO THE PETITIONER.`
`Exhibit`	`P5`	`TRUE` `SHARI`	`COPY` `NG TH`	`OF` `E D`	`THE` `ETAIL`	`COMMU` `S IN`	`NICATION DATED 1.8.2022` `EXCEL FORMAT.`
`Exhibit`	`P6`	`TRUE` `RAISE`	`COPY` `D BY`	`OF` `THE`	`THE` `PETI`	`COMP` `TION`	`LAINT DATED 30.12.2022` `ER.`
`Exhibit`	`P7`	`TRUE` `9.9.2`	`COPY` `021.`	`OF`	`SHIP`	`PING`	`BILL NO. 4471412 DATED`
`Exhibit`	`P8`	`TRUE` `DATED`	`COPY` `23.8`	`OF` `.20`	`THE` `21.`	`SHIP`	`PING BILL NO. 4058929`
`Exhibit`	`P9`	`TRUE` `7.2.2` `3RD R`	`COPY` `023 S` `ESPON`	`UBM` `DEN`	`OF` `ITTE` `T.`	`THE` `D BY`	`REPRESENTATION DATED` `THE PETITIONER TO THE`
`Exhibit`	`P10`	`TRUE` `11.2.`	`COPY` `2023.`		`OF`	`THE`	`REPRESENTATION DATED`
`Exhibit`	`P11`	`True` `31.12`	`copy` `.2020`	`.`	`of A`	`dvis`	`ory No. 50/20 dated`
`Exhibit`	`P12`	`True` `W.P.(`	`copy` `C) No`	`of` `. 2`	`the j` `5339/`	`udgm` `2019`	`ent dated 13.11.2019 in` `.`

Kitex Childrenswear Ltd., v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kitex Childrenswear Ltd., v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. M.C. Eldho & Company, Vs the State Tax Officer

Lekha G P Vs the Manager, Life Insurance Corporation, Kalpatta

Subrahmanian Vs the District Collector

M/S. Panazan Enterprises (P) Ltd., Vs State of Kerala

Kitex Garments Ltd, Vs Union of India

South Indian Assemblies of God (Malayalam District Council), Vs State of Kerala