9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 882X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his notification is available to them subject to certain conditions specified in the notification and the main condition subject to which the refund of SAD is available, are - (i) importer of the goods shall pay all duties of customs including Special Customs Duty leviable on the goods at the time of importation of the goods, (ii) the importer while issuing invoices for sale of the goods shall specifically indicate on the invoices that no credit of Special Additional Customs Duty levied under Section 3 (5) of the Customs Act shall be admissible, (iii) the importer shall file the refund claim of SAD before expiry of one year from the date of the SAD and (iv) while filing the refund claim for SAD, the document regarding payment of sales tax o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant that the impugned order was dispatched on the date on which they submitted their reply to deficiency memo. Moreover, this office is not a refund sanctioning authority and therefore, I will not verify the documents, submitted with the appellant's letter dated 12.11.2012, to check whether they are proper or not. As already discussed in foregoing paras, the mater of refund has already been decided, therefore, I cannot direct the refund sanctioning authority to check the documents submitted by the appellant vide their letter dated 12.11.2012. 2. Heard both the sides. 3. Shri Anil Tiwari, Ld. Counsel for the appellant, pleaded that firstly the order of the Assistant Commissioner is an ex parte order without hearing the appellant and withou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the SAD, and that in view of this, the impugned order is not correct. 4. Shri A.Jin, the Departmental Representative, defended the impugned order and pleaded that though the deficiency memo mentioning the defects in the refund claim on which the appellants clarification is required, had been issued to them, in this regard, a date of personal hearing was fixed, that since the appellant did not appear before the adjudicating authority, the adjudicating authority has correctly decided their matter ex parte, that no explanation has been given by the appellant for not making a declaration on the original copies of the sales invoice regarding non-admissibility of the Cenvat Credit of SAD when this is a mandatory requirement and that in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpliance with the condition of endorsement of invoices to reflect that SAD has not been passed on to the buyers and in such a situation , the refund claim of SAD cannot be rejected on the ground that declaration regarding non-admissibility of Cenvat Credit of SAD was not made. The other ground on which the refund claim of SAD has been rejected is that the original documents regarding payment of VAT/CST and correlation of VAT/CST challans with the import documents has not been given. The appellants contention is that they can satisfy the original adjudicating authority in respect of all the points but they were not given the opportunity. In view of this, the impugned order has to be set aside and the matter has to be remanded back to the or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
