Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): P. Dinesha (Judicial Member), allowed an appeal filed with the issue of denial of refund of 4% Special Additional Duty (SAD) under the Customs Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. dated 14-09-2007, as amended. During adjudication, the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Refunds) had granted a partial refund against which the appellant preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority which was rejected by the Commissioner of Customs, thus the present appeal was filed.

The Tribunal while allowing the appeal explained that High Court had categorically answered the doubts raised by the authorities while restricting/denying the refund claim of 4% SAD stating that the goods imported and the goods sold are one and the same and are co-relatable and the department had not proved that the goods sold were different from the goods imported. The lower authority had not disputed the fulfillment of the other substantive conditions of the notification by the appellants thus rejection of partial amount of refund on this flimsy ground was not sustainable. Hence, for the same reason, the impugned order was set aside. [P.P. Products (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Customs Appeal No. C/42420 of 2014, decided on 20-02-2020]

Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Criminology, Penology and Victimology book release

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.