2017 (5) TMI 379 - AT - Customs

Refund of SAD - N/N. 102/2007 dated 14.09.2007 - import of Digital Set Top Boxes (STB) along with certain other equipments, and sale as such - denial on the ground that STBs were not sold as such but were assembled with other items and were sold as antenna systems and accessories , the descriptions in the bills of entry did not match the description in the domestic sale invoices and appropriate VAT was not paid as the appellants sold the products at a price lower than the price of import - Held that - the identical issue pertaining to refund of SAD under Customs Notification No. 102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007, for the earlier period had already been decided by the Tribunal in favour of the appellant in the case of M/s. Dish TV India Ltd. Versus C.C. (ICD) Tughlakabad, New Delhi 2016 (10) TMI 861 - CESTAT NEW DELHI , where it was held that, The invoices for sale issued by the appellant describes the goods as antenna system and accessories , however from the packing list attached with invoice it can be clearly made out that this package includes STBs. - Refund cannot be disallowed on this ground. There is no stipulation in the notification that the exemption is available only if the rate of ST/VAT is equal to or higher than the rate of additional duty of Customs; nor is there a condition that if the rate of ST/VAT happens to be lower than 4%, the refund would be restricted to the lower amount - refund allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Refund of Special Additional Duty (SAD) under Customs Notification No. 102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007.

Analysis:
The appellant, engaged in providing Direct to Home Services, imported Set Top Boxes (STBs) and sold them in the domestic market. The dispute arose regarding the refund of SAD paid on the imported STBs based on declared retail sale price (RSP). The appellant claimed refunds of SAD paid, which were rejected by the Assistant Commissioner and upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) for not meeting the conditions specified in the notification. The main grounds for rejection were that the STBs were not sold as imported, descriptions did not match in invoices, and alleged inadequate VAT payment. The Tribunal had previously allowed refund claims for the appellant for an earlier period under the same notification.

The Tribunal noted that in a previous decision, it had allowed refund claims for the appellant under the same notification for a similar issue. The Tribunal found that the appellant sold the imported STBs as part of antenna systems and accessories at a price lower than the import cost, but the invoices clearly showed the package included STBs. The Tribunal also highlighted that the appropriate VAT had been paid on the STBs at the time of sale, even though the prices were lower than the declared RSP at import. The Ministry of Finance's circular clarified that the exemption did not depend on VAT rates being equal to or higher than the Customs duty rate. Therefore, the Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order based on the earlier decision in the appellant's favor.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for the refund of SAD under Customs Notification No. 102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007, following a previous decision in the appellant's favor. The Tribunal found that the appellant had sold the imported STBs as part of antenna systems and accessories, paid appropriate VAT, and met the conditions for the refund, contrary to the findings of the lower authorities.