Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2021 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (3) TMI 726 - AT - CustomsRefund of SAD - sales during pre-GST period - Sale of goods at NIL / Exempted rate of VAT - Notification No.34/1998-Cus has been rescinded vide Notification No.58/1998-Cus dt. 01/08/1998 - HELD THAT:- the Assistant Commissioner while rejecting the refund claim of ₹ 76,706/- has relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CC, Mumbai Vs. Seiko Brushware India but the said decision is in respect of Notification No.34/1998-Cus. dt. 13/06/1998 wherein the proviso disallows exemption from SAD if the goods are sold from a place where there is no sales tax on the goods. But in the present case, the appellant has claimed the refund of SAD on the basis of Notification No.102/2007-Cus dt. 14/09/2007 which only specifies that “appropriate sales tax should be paid”. This issue is no more res integra and has been settled by various decisions of the Tribunal including the decision of this Tribunal in the appellant’s own case VALLABHDAS AND CO. BALAKRISHNA SALES CORPORATION VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS COCHIN [2017 (5) TMI 1371 - CESTAT BANGALORE] wherein the Tribunal has allowed all the appeals by relying upon the earlier decisions of the Tribunal. Besides this, I find that both the authorities have wrongly relied upon the decision of the Apex Court which was in respect of Notification No. 34/1998-Cus. dated 13.06.1998. Further I find that the said Notification 34/1998 has been subsequently rescinded by Notification 58/1998-Cus. dated 01.08.1998. Therefore, reliance by both the parties on a Notification which has been rescinded is not tenable in law. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|