9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 195X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7. Also, in support of their argument that the burden of 4% SAD has been borne by them, the Ld. Adv. has demonstrated, besides the Chartered Accountant s Certificate certifying that the burden of duty has been borne by them, by comparing the value of the cars imported sold indicating that refund amount has not been collected from their customers; also the refund amount due to the Appellant has been reflected in the respective balance-sheet as receivable. To ascertain the eligibility of refund of 4% SAD paid at the time of import of CARS(CBU), all the relevant documents need to be scrutinized thoroughly in respect of each of the claim filed - Matter needs reconsideration - appeal allowed by way of remand. - Customs Miscellaneous Appl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he cars sold, secondly the hurdle of unjust enrichment could not be crossed. On adjudication, the refunds were rejected. Consequently, they filed Appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), who rejected their appeal. Hence, the present appeal. 4. Learned Advocate Shri T. Viswanathan for the appellant has submitted that along with the refund application, they have filed all relevant documents i.e. sales invoice along with corresponding VAT/CST challans of the imported Cars for the period for which the claims have been filed. Since each of the imported car had a specific frame/chasis no. and engine no. reflected in the import documents and also in the sales invoices, the same had been correlated and VAT Auditor s certifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AD paid on the imported cars (CBU) which were subsequently sold by them, in accordance with Notification No. 102/2007-Cus dated 14.9.2007. Both the authorities below have rejected the refund claims on the ground that the appellant could not correlate between the imported cars and the ones sold in the local market on payment of VAT; also the Appellants have failed to show that the burden of 4% SAD had not passed on to others. 8. Learned Advocate for the appellant demonstrated on sample basis before us referring to the Chasis/frame and engine no. of the imported cars and the ones shown in the respective sales documents indicating that the same cars (CBU) that were imported had been sold by them satisfying the condition of Noti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
