9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 980X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s laid down under N/N. 102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007, therefore, denial of refund only on the ground that the sales invoices was raised prior to out of charge, is contrary to the principle of law laid down by this Tribunal in the case of Radius Infotech vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi [2016 (3) TMI 189 - CESTAT NEW DELHI], where the refund was allowed by holding that the appellant submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s) of Customs, Ahmedabad. 3. The short issue involved in the present case is: whether the appellants are entitled to refund claims of ₹ 91,959/- (in Appeal No.C/10649/2015) and ₹ 62,965/- (in Appeal No.C/10653/2015 2015) Special Additional Duty (4% SAD) filed under Notification No.102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007. In their written submission and also in their grounds of appeal, the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he principle of law laid down by this Tribunal in the case of Radius Infotech vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi (CARGO EXPORT) - 2016 (337) ELT 305 (Tri. - Del.). 4. Ld. AR for the Revenue reiterated the findings of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). 5. I find that the issue is covered by the decision of Tribunal in the case of Radius Infotech s case (supra). In similar circumstanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sheet certified by a Chartered Accountant containing details of Bills of Entry and sale invoices and payment of VAT/CST. Considering the factual position as explained above, I find that the rejection of refund for the reasons cited by the lower authority is not sustainable. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. 6. Following the above decision, I do not find merit in the impugned orders, accord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
