2021 (8) TMI 539 - AT - Customs

Refund of SAD - refund denied for not having discharged appropriate tax on sale and for failure to correlate the invoices of sale with the bills of entry pertaining to the imports - HELD THAT - The imported goods, upon sale in the domestic market, are entitled to post facto exemption from special additional duty upon furnishing of sales invoices and that, despite the impugned goods being exempted from tax on sale, the eligibility for refund of special additional duties of customs is not, thereby, discountenanced. Though, in a manner of speaking, there is no specific finding that the goods claimed to have been sold were other than the goods on which special additional duty had been discharged at the time of import, the exemption available under Maharashtra VAT Act, 2002 combined with the description in the sale invoices were stated to have caused disquiet. The appellant was unable to reconcile the difference in description and entitlement to refund was the casualty. It would appear that the absence of any clarification from the Joint Commissioner of Animal Husbandry, sought for vide letter dated 15 th June 2018 and 27th June 2018, also contributed to doubt. It would be appropriate for the appellant herein to furnish all necessary information to the original authority for a proper determination that the goods, covered by the furnished invoices, were the same as those imported which is the only satisfaction prescribed in notification no. 102/2007 dated 14 th September 2007 - the original authority is directed to consider the application afresh and to dispose off the claim for refund accordingly within a period of three months from the receipt of this order - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
1. Rejection of refund claims for special additional duty on imported goods.
2. Discrepancy in tax payment on sale and failure to correlate invoices with bills of entry.
3. Disregard of supporting documents by the first appellate authority.
4. Requirement for proper determination of goods sold for refund eligibility.

Analysis:
The case involved a dispute by M/s Avivet Nutritional Services Pvt Ltd against the rejection of four refund claims amounting to &8377; 94,59,133/- for special additional duty on imported goods. The appellant imported probiotics classified under heading 3002 9030 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The refund was denied due to alleged failure to discharge appropriate tax on sale and inability to correlate sale invoices with import bills of entry.

The appellant argued that the sale of goods post-import was not in dispute, and exemption from value-added tax on sale was certified by a Chartered Accountant. Several supporting documents, including a certificate from the Government of Maharashtra, were disregarded by the first appellate authority. The impugned order listed grounds for dissatisfaction with the tax payment on sale.

The Tribunal noted that despite the goods being exempted from tax on sale, the eligibility for refund of special additional duties was not established. The discrepancy in goods description and entitlement to refund raised doubts. The absence of clarification from the Joint Commissioner of Animal Husbandry further contributed to uncertainty. The Tribunal directed the appellant to provide necessary information to the original authority for a proper determination of goods sold, as required by the notification. The impugned order was set aside, and the original authority was directed to reconsider the application and dispose of the refund claim within three months.

In conclusion, the appeal was disposed of by remanding it to the original authority for further review and determination based on the information provided by the appellant.