Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2018 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 1254 - AT - CustomsRefund of SAD - rejection on the ground that invoice did not contain the endorsement as required under para 2(b) of notification declaring that no Cenvat credit is admissible on the SAD paid - Held that: - The said issue stands covered by the decision in the case of Chowgule & Company Pvt Ltd Vs CC & CE [2014 (8) TMI 214 - CESTAT MUMBAI (LB)], where it was held that Condition relating to endorsement on the invoice was merely a procedural one and the purpose and object of such an endorsement could be achieved when the duty element itself was not specified in the invoice. Since the object and purpose of the condition is achieved by non-specification of the duty element the mere non-making of the endorsement could not have undermined the purpose of the exemption - rejection of refund claim on this ground is unjustified and requires to be set aside. Refund claim also rejected on the ground that description of the goods in the Bill of Entry does not match with the description of goods in the sales invoice - Held that: - The mere mention of grades of plastic granules in the sales invoice cannot be a ground to deny the substantive benefit of refund, when there is no dispute that appellant has sold the very same goods that have been imported - issue stands covered by the decision in the case of CC, Chennai vs Shri Ram Impex India (P) Ltd. [2013 (11) TMI 1354 - CESTAT CHENNAI], where it was held that There is no condition in the Notification that the Bill of Entry number should be mentioned in the sale invoice - refund to be allowed. Refund also rejected on the ground that appellant has not produced the consignment sale agreement copy - Held that: - When there is no dispute to the discharge of VAT/Sales Tax, the department cannot reject the refund claims, stating that there is no evidence to show that the liability to pay sales tax is fixed on appellant as per agreement - refund cannot be rejected. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|