9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1085X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Authorized Representative (A.R.) for the Respondent ORDER The very short issue involved in this appeal is the refund of 4% of Special Additional Duty (SAD) under the Customs Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. dated 14.09.2007, as amended. The Adjudicating Authority namely, the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Refunds) vide Order-in-Original No. 18784/2012 dated 08.05.2012 had sanctioned the refund ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eared for the Revenue. 3. Ld. Advocate for the assessee submitted at the outset that the appeal relates to the period July 2010 to September 2010, an identical issue has already been decided by this very Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Tarajyot Polymers Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai & ors. in Customs Appeal No. 42373 of 2014 and other connected appeals, wherein even the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ision in the case of M/s. Tarajyot Polymers Ltd. (supra), I note that this Bench has inter alia held that the rejection of refund was unjustified, in the following words : "7. ... b. The second reason for rejection of refund claim is that description of the goods in the Bill of Entry does not match with the description of goods in the sales invoice. In the invoice only the generic description ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s sold in the Order-in-Original which is duly supported by the certificate of a qualified Chartered Accountant, which fact has not at all been disputed by the Revenue which in effect proves that the Adjudicating Authority had no such difficulties insofar as correlations, etc., are concerned. The above findings in the Order-in-Original is based on the verification of relevant documents like the inv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
