IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CUSTOM APPEAL NO. 19 OF 2004 The Commissioner of Customs (Imports) .. Appellant Versus P & O Indian Agencies Pvt. Ltd. .. Respondent Mr. P. S. Jetly for the appellant Mr. K. Shriram a/w Subra Kharmakar & Xavier Thomas for the respondent CORAM: V. C. DAGA, & S. J. KATHAWALLA, JJ. DATED: 26th July, 2010 P. C. 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent. Perused appeal. 2. This appeal was admitted to consider the following substantial question of law: Whether after taking into consideration the facts mentioned hereinabove “ the Hon ble CESTAT is justified in setting aside the legal and reasonable ’ order dated 10.12.1996 passed by the Commissioner of Custom (Import)” 3. Having heard rival parties, it appears that when cargo was unloaded at the destination port, it was not manifested in the I.G.M. Thus the import was in contravention of the provisions of the Customs Act. 4. However, well within reasonable time, the amendment to IG.M. was sought which was allowed to be amended by an order dated 19.11.1996. In view of the amendment to the I.G.M., the Tribunal held that there was no contravention of the statute since the amendment related back to the date of import. This finding is to be found in para 6 of the impugned order. 5. Once the I.G.M. is allowed to be amended, the breach of the provisions of he Act stands rectified. The rectification is permitted under the provisions of the Act. The Tribunal has taken the same view. Under the circumstances, the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) for the reasons recorded in the impugned order. 6. In the result, the above question is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the respondent. 7. Appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. (S. J. KATHAWALLA, J.) (V. C. DAGA, J.)