Cenvat Credit refund under Rule 5 succeeds where customs certification on export documents satisfies notification requirements.

Refund of unutilised Cenvat credit under Rule 5 was found to be properly sanctioned where the shipping bills and AR-I copies were certified by the customs officer as evidence of export. The only objection was that the documents were not separately attested in the manner alleged by Revenue, but the customs certification requirement under Notification No. 5/2006 was satisfied on the face of the records. The exporter's signature on photocopies was treated only as copy attestation and did not dilute the customs endorsement of export.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim of unutilised Cenvat credit under Rule 5 was rightly allowed when the shipping bills and AR-I copies were certified by the customs officer and not separately attested in the manner alleged by Revenue.

Analysis: The refund was claimed by an exporter under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 on the strength of shipping bills and AR-I copies. The only objection raised was that the documents were not duly certified by the customs officer as required by Notification No. 5/2006. On examination of the documents, the Customs officer had in fact certified that the goods had been exported. The respondent's signature on the photocopies was only for attestation of copies and did not detract from the customs certification. The notification required customs certification of the relevant shipping bill, which stood satisfied.

Conclusion: The refund claim was validly sanctioned and the Revenue's appeal was not maintainable on this ground.

---