Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Commissioner of Customs Vs Mirc Electronics Ltd. (CESTAT Bangalore)
Appeal Number : Customs Appeal No. 1014 of 2012
Date of Judgement/Order : 05/09/2023
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Commissioner of Customs Vs Mirc Electronics Ltd. (CESTAT Bangalore)

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) Bangalore recently addressed an issue related to the refund of 4% Special Additional Duty (SAD) on imported goods. The case, Commissioner of Customs vs. Mirc Electronics Ltd., revolves around whether the requirement exists for Value Added Tax (VAT) Challans to display the Bill of Entry. This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the case and the CESTAT’s decision to dismiss the appeal.

1. Case Background: The case involves Mirc Electronics Ltd., which had imported goods under Bill of Entry No. 227374 dated 14.07.2008. The company cleared the goods by paying the necessary Customs duty and Rs. 49,842/- as a 4% SAD refund. Subsequently, after selling the goods, the company submitted a refund application on 06.07.2009, accompanied by supporting documents.

2. Refund Rejection and Appeal: The Customs authorities issued a deficiency memo, alleging that the company had not provided documents such as a Sale Tax Authority certificate, correlating VAT payments with the Bill of Entry, a summary of sales certified by a Chartered Accountant, and hard copies of sale invoices. Based on this, the Adjudication Authority, through Order-In-Original No. 159 of 2009 dated 16.10.2009, rejected the refund claim. Dissatisfied with this decision, the company appealed to the Commissioner (Appeals).

3. Commissioner (Appeals) Decision: The Commissioner (Appeals) issued Order-In-Appeal No. 20/2012 dated 17.02.2012, allowing the company’s appeal. The Commissioner (Appeals) concluded that the company had met the conditions of Notification No. 102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007. The statutory auditor of the importing company had provided certificates linking each sale invoice to the corresponding Bill of Entry, and the SAD amount was accounted for in the financial records for the year 2008-09.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

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

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031