Refund eligibility under export notification upheld where goods, realisation, and CHA invoice description were established despite missing buyer agreement.

Refund under Notification No. 41/2007 could not be denied solely because the agreement with the overseas buyer was not produced when export of goods, receipt of consideration, and the description of the goods in the CHA invoice were otherwise established. The CHA invoice satisfied the relevant documentary condition by describing the exported goods, and the undisputed export and realisation of consideration supported eligibility. On those facts, non-production of the buyer agreement was not a sufficient ground to reject the claim, and the refund was held admissible with the rejection order set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim under Notification No. 41/2007 could be denied for non-production of the agreement with the overseas buyer when the export of goods, receipt of consideration, and description of goods in the CHA invoice were otherwise established.

Analysis: The invoice issued by the CHA contained a description of the exported goods, satisfying the relevant condition of the notification. The fact of export and receipt of consideration was not in dispute. In these circumstances, the absence of the agreement between the foreign buyer and the appellant could not, by itself, justify rejection of the refund claim.

Conclusion: The refund claim was held to be admissible and the rejection order was set aside.

---