Typographical Error in Bills of Entry regarding Ambers of iRET Switches Imported: CESTAT deletes Penalty [Read Order]

The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) held that due to typographical error occurring in the bills of entry regarding Ambers of Internal Remote Electrical Tilt Switches ( iRET ) Switches imported penalty shall not be imposed. The Appellant Huber + Sunher Electronics Pvt. Ltd manufactures and sells Base Transceiver Station ( BTS ) antennas and for this purpose, imports Internal Remote Electrical Tilt Switches ( iRET ). These help in remotely tilting the angle of the antenna. During the period 2.2.2018 and 31.3.2019, the appellant imported iRETs of two modelsRunshine RS-IRCU50D-1 and Runshine RS-IRCU50D-2, self assessed the duty on them applying the benefit of Exemption notification no. 50/2017-Cus dated 30.6.2017 (S.NO. 427) and cleared the goods. During post clearance audit, it was noticed that the iRETs imported by the appellant were declared in the Bills of Entry and all the other documents such as invoice, packing list, etc. to be of ‘5 amperes’ whereas the exemption notification 50/2017 (S.No.427) was available only to switches of less than 5 amperes. Hence the appellant had incorrectly applied this notification and duty must be paid but for this exemption notification.Accordingly Show Cause Notice was issued to the appellant covering the period 2.2.2018 to 31.3.2019 and demanding the duty allegedly short paid and proposing to impose penalty. Aggrieved by the order the appellant filed appeal before the tribunal. B L Narasimhan , Counsel for appellant submitted that the switches were actually of < 5 amperes (1.3 amperes) but ‘<’ sign was inadvertently missed by its supplier in all the documents and the appellant also copied the same mistake while describing the goods in the Bills of Entry. In subsequent imports, they corrected this mistake and in all imports they mention the actual amperage and all the Bills of Entry were assessed and cleared accordingly M R Dhania, Counsel for the department, supported the order of lower authorities and argued that the declaration in the Bills of Entry cannot be modified based on these documents and therefore, based on the declarations made in the Bills of Entry, duty should was determined in the impugned order and the short paid duty was ordered to be recovered. It was observed that iRETs of the two models were imported against the disputed Bills of Entry and the Bills of Entry as well as the other documents such as Invoice and Packing List issued by the supplier specified ‘5 amperes’. Further viewed that If they were of 5 amperes, the benefit of the notification will not be available. The case of the appellant is that they were of less than 5 amperes but in the invoice and packing list “<” sign was inadvertently missed and the same mistake was also repeated in the Bills of Entry. However the bench confirmed that there was a typographical error in the Bills of Entry and the invoices which has resulted in the audit objection, the SCN and the impugned order. Thus, if there is a discrepancy between what is stated to have been imported in the documents and the Bill of Entry and what is actually imported, duty can be charged on what is actually imported and not on what is said to have been imported. A Two-Member Bench comprising Justice Dilip Gupta, (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) allowed the appeal filed by the appellant. Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates