Case Law Details
Marina Enterprises Vs Commissioner, Customs, Central Goods & Service Tax and Central Excise (CESTAT Delhi)
Admittedly the appellant have sold the goods in India after importing and have paid sales tax on the said goods. Admittedly, they are registered with the Sales Tax Department having TIN number and have charged sales tax in their sales bill. Further, from the sample copy of sales bill produced before this Tribunal, it is evident that appellant have not given break-up of additional duty or SAD in their sale bill. Further, the appellant have mentioned on the body of sale invoice that – no benefit of additional custom duty levied under subsection (5) of Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act shall be admissible.
Thus, evidently the buyer of the goods from the appellant cannot take the benefit or credit of SAD of Customs, which was paid by the appellant – importer at the time of import.
Considering the rival contentions and in the facts and circumstances, it is evident that it is the appellant – importer who has borne the incidence of special additional duty (SAD) and has not passed on the same to the buyer of the goods.
Accordingly, I find that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) have erred in holding that the refund claim was hit under the doctrine of unjust enrichment. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The appellant is held entitled to refund of the amount of SAD Rs.5,43,443/-.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
