Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : M/s Sim Enterprises Vs Commissioner of Customs (Export) (CESTAT Mumbai)
Appeal Number : Custom Appeal No. 876 of 2012
Date of Judgement/Order : 19/04/2022
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

M/s Sim Enterprises Vs Commissioner of Customs (Export) (CESTAT Mumbai)

Mismatch of description of goods in the import document and subsequent sale invoices that form the sole ground of rejection of refund claim of 4% SAD by the refund sanctioning authority that was confirmed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) is assailed in this appeal.

In the instant case Statutory Auditor namely Chartered Accountant had issued certificates in respect of all five refund claims, which are also annexed to the appeal memo at page 51, 61, 86 ,126, 169 and noted in the Order-in-Original as well as Order-in-Appeal, which were also produced along with original sale invoices. Therefore, erroneously applying CBEC Circular No. 15/2010-Cus dated 29.06.2010 concerning filing of fraudulent documents like duplicates invoices to seek refund against stock not sold out, is not at all applicable to the Appellant case. Further, there is a clear findings of the Hon’ble Madras High Court reported in 2020 (374) ELT 519 (Mad.) in the case of Johnson Lifts Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Refunds), Chennai concerning the admissibility of CA certificate along with original sale invoice wherein it was clearly stipulated that the respondent-department is bound to accept the description of goods in the import documents as well as sale invoice to be one and the same, on the strength of the certificate/correlation statement issued by the Statutory Auditor (Chartered Accountant) (Para 10 of the last line of order).

In obedience to the judicial precedent set by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras, The appeal is allowed and the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai Zone-I vide Order-in-Appeal No. 338/MCH/AC/CRARS/2012 dated 22.03.2012 to the extent of denial of refund of SAD is hereby set aside. The appellant is entitled to get a refund of Rs.12,73,120/- with applicable interest and the respondent-department is directed to pay the same within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of this order.

FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT MUMBAI ORDER

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
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031