2013 (5) TMI 217 - AT - Customs

Eligibility of notification claiming refund of Special Additional Duty Notification No.102/2007-Cus had exempted the goods imported into India for subsequent sale, from the whole of the additional duty leviable hereon under sub-section (5) of Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (referred to as SAD) subject to some conditions. According to the revenue, the respondent did not duly comply with the conditions of notification. Cross objection was filed by the respondent. Held that - On a careful examination of the records filed by the respondent with their cross objections , tribunal find that, barring a specimen copy of sale invoice, the relevant invoices covering sales of all the imported goods within the prescribed time limit have not been produced by the respondent even at this stage. The Chartered Accountant s certificate did not mention, of any of the sale invoices. This certificate does not even specify the particulars of the imported goods so as to establish a correlation. we set aside the impugned order and allow this appeal by way of remand with a request to the original authority to decide afresh on the refund claims filed by the assessee after giving them a reasonable opportunity of being personally heard. The appeal stands disposed off. The cross objections filed by the respondent are also disposed off. The stay petition also stands disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Stay of operation of the impugned order regarding refund claims related to Special Additional Duty (SAD) paid on imported goods.

Analysis:
The department sought a stay on the impugned order favoring the respondent's refund claims for SAD paid on goods imported from October 2007 to March 2008. The appeal was considered for final disposal without requiring a pre-deposit.

The original authority rejected the refund claims due to non-compliance with conditions specified in Notification No.102/2007-Cus. The notification mandated the importer to pay all duties, indicate no credit of SAD in sales invoices, file refund claims within a year, pay appropriate sales tax, and provide specific documents. The party failed to produce all required documents, leading to rejection of the claims.

The Commissioner (Appeals) later accepted a Chartered Accountant's certificate as sufficient evidence for compliance and allowed the refund claims. However, the appellant challenged this decision, arguing that the party did not fulfill all conditions, especially regarding the sale invoices within the prescribed period.

Upon review, it was found that the respondent still lacked evidence of sales invoices covering all imported goods within the specified time limit. The Chartered Accountant's certificate did not adequately address this requirement, leading to a decision to set aside the impugned order and remand the case for the respondent to provide necessary evidence.

The judgment directed the original authority to reevaluate the refund claims with an opportunity for the respondent to present evidence of compliance with the notification conditions and to be heard. The appeal was allowed for remand, giving the respondent a chance to rectify the deficiencies in their submission.

Ultimately, the impugned order was set aside, the appeal allowed for remand, and the cross objections filed by the respondent were disposed of. The judgment emphasized the importance of complying with all conditions specified in the exemption notification for refund claims related to SAD paid on imported goods.