2015 (3) TMI 552 - AT - Customs

Denial of the refund of SAD - in terms of Section 28C of the Customs Act, 1962, the duty component has not been mentioned in the invoice - Held that - As per Section 28C of the Customs Act, 1962, if the assessee is paying duty then same should be reflected in the sale invoice. Admittedly, in this case the appellant has not paid any duty on their clearances except VAT/CST which has been shown separately in the invoice. Further, refund of SAD is applicable where the assessee cleared the goods on payment of VAT/CST - I have examined the invoice also, wherein the endorsement regarding that no credit of additional duty of customs is available to the buyer, is clearly mentioned in the invoice. The finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) after extracting the copy of the invoice in the impugned order that invoice does not have endorsement that no credit of additional duty of customs levied under sub-section (5) of Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 shall be available. This finding is factually incorrect. As there is a clear endorsement made on the invoice, therefore the impugned order deserves no merits; hence set aside. Appeal is allowed with consequential relief. The Adjudicating Authority is directed to implement this order within 30 days of the receipt of the same. - Decided in favour of assesse.

Summary

Issues:
Refund of Special Additional Duty (SAD) denial.

Analysis:
The appellant, a trader, imported goods and paid SAD, later clearing the goods on payment of CST/VAT and filing a refund claim for the SAD paid. The claim was rejected citing non-mention of duty component in the invoice and absence of an endorsement regarding non-admissibility of additional duty on customs. The appellant contended that as a trader, they clear goods on payment of VAT/CST with proper endorsement on the invoice. The appellant argued that Section 28C of the Customs Act does not mandate showing duty component separately as no duty is paid on these goods. The appellant relied on a previous decision to support their case.

The Appellate Tribunal noted that Section 28C requires duty payment to be reflected in the sale invoice. In this case, the appellant did not pay any duty other than VAT/CST, which was shown separately in the invoice. The Tribunal found that SAD refund is applicable when goods are cleared on payment of VAT/CST. Upon examining the invoice, the Tribunal observed a clear endorsement stating that no credit of additional duty of customs is available to the buyer. The Tribunal disagreed with the Commissioner's finding that the invoice lacked the required endorsement, deeming it factually incorrect. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief. The Adjudicating Authority was directed to implement the order within 30 days of receipt.

In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the importance of proper endorsements on invoices and clarifying the requirements for SAD refund eligibility under Section 28C of the Customs Act.