2018 (8) TMI 637 - AT - Customs

Refund of SAD - N/N. 102/2007-Cus - rejection of refund on the ground that the importer has not given any indication or declaration in the sale invoices submitted by him along with the refund applications, either in CD form or in paper form - Held that - It is an admitted fact that in invoice of resale of the imported goods, the appellant have not shown SAD paid, on such invoices, nor any details of bill of entry under which the goods were imported - there cannot be deemed passing of the duty, particularly SAD. Reliance placed in the case of Chowgule & Company Pvt.Ltd. 2014 (8) TMI 214 - CESTAT MUMBAI (LB) . Refund allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Rejection of refund under Notification No.102/2007-Cus for 4% SAD paid at the time of import of goods.

Analysis:
The issue in this appeal pertains to the rejection of a refund under Notification No.102/2007-Cus for the 4% Special Additional Duty (SAD) paid during the import of goods. The appellant had filed a refund application seeking reimbursement of the SAD paid on imported goods through multiple Bills of Entry between March 2008 and November 2009. The Deputy Commissioner rejected the refund claim, citing the absence of a specific indication in the sale invoices regarding the inadmissibility of credit for the SAD levied under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The rejection was based on the lack of such declaration in the invoices submitted by the importer. Only two Bills of Entry were exempted from rejection due to jurisdictional issues.

The appellant subsequently appealed to the Commissioner (Appeals), who upheld the original order rejecting the refund claim. During the proceedings, the appellant's counsel referenced a Larger Bench decision in the case of Chowgule & Company Pvt. Ltd. The Tribunal in that case had outlined specific particulars required in invoices for claiming Cenvat Credit, emphasizing the need to indicate details of duty paid, goods description, assessable value, registration numbers, and other relevant information. The Tribunal held that without such particulars, no credit could be passed to the buyer. In the current appeal, the invoices for resale of imported goods did not include details of the SAD paid or the Bill of Entry under which the goods were imported. Following the precedent set by the Larger Bench decision, the Tribunal concluded that there was no deemed passing of duty, particularly SAD, through the invoices.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal regarding the refund of SAD, except for the two Bills of Entry previously mentioned. The authorities were directed to process the refund within 30 days, along with applicable interest, in accordance with the rules.