9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 720X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t considered by both the authorities. Further the certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant was held as false certificate without any basis. The said certificate was furnished as per the requirement of the Notification which should have been considered by both the authorities in order to decide the claim of the appellant but the same was not done. The case need to be remanded back to the original authority with the direction to consider the correlation sheets filed by the appellants certified by the Chartered Accountant for claiming the refund of SAD - appeal allowed by way of remand. - C/20378/2019-SM, C/20347/2019-SM - Final Order Nos. 20409-20410/2019 - Dated:- 9-5-2019 - SHRI S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing 4% SAD which they subsequently claimed as refund from Cochin Customs in terms of Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. upon sale of those machines on payment of VAT/Sales Tax. Appellants in the past used to submit the refund claim to Customs Authorities who after verification and after satisfying that the claims meet all the requirements of the above Notification No. 102/2007 Cus. used to sanction the refund claims. With regard to the present refund claims, the original authority on verification of the refund application find that the appellants had submitted forged and edited copies of invoices. The original authority gave a few examples in support of finding and the original authority also held that the Chartered Accountant gave a false cert ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame. He further submitted that refund sanctioning authority was total bias and found fault with their invoices stating that the invoices are forged and thereby they have not complied with the conditions of Notification No. 102/2007 Cus. and accordingly issued a show-cause notice for denial of refund. During the personal hearing, the appellant explained the correct facts and also furnished correlation statement prepared by the Chartered Accountant as per the requirement of the Notification but the same was not considered at all and the refunds were rejected. He further submitted that the appellate authority also did not consider the submissions made by the appellant and rejected the appeal. He also submitted that the appellants have sold the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tement of reconciliation filed by the Chartered Accountant after verifying the record have also been held by both the authorities as false. 5. On the other hand the learned AR defended the impugned order. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that the appellants have imported the Multi Digital Function machines and thereafter cleared the same on payment of SAD @ 4% and thereafter sold the same to various purchasers on payment of VAT/CST and thereafter filed the refund claim under Notification 102/2007 along with all the documents and the reconciliation statement but the Customs Authorities issued him a show-cause notice on the allegations that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
