Substantive compliance for SAD refund lets invoices satisfy notification conditions without exact prescribed wording.

Refund of Special Additional Duty under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. was treated as dependent on substantive compliance with the invoice condition, not on verbatim reproduction of the prescribed phrase. The court noted that where the invoice as a whole clearly shows that no additional customs duty credit is admissible, the refund requirement is met, and a purely literal insistence on exact wording is unwarranted. The prescribed language was characterised as procedural rather than mandatory in form, so omission of the exact words did not by itself defeat the refund claim.

---

---

Issues: Whether refund of Special Additional Duty under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. could be denied merely because the invoice did not reproduce the exact words prescribed by the notification.

Analysis: The refund scheme was linked to the condition that the invoice should indicate that no credit of the additional customs duty would be admissible. The Court noted that Rule 9 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 requires the duty element and its particulars to be shown in the invoice for availment of credit, and that a commercial invoice which does not disclose duty particulars itself indicates that no such credit is available. The prescribed wording in the notification was treated as procedural rather than magical in character, and the Court held that if the intention is otherwise made clear by the invoice, the benefit of refund cannot be refused on a purely literal insistence on exact words.

Conclusion: The omission of the exact phrase did not defeat the refund claim, and the assessee remained entitled to refund of SAD.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed because the Tribunal's view that substantive compliance with the notification was sufficient was upheld, and the refund claim stood protected.

Ratio Decidendi: A refund condition in a beneficial notification is satisfied where the invoice, read as a whole, clearly conveys that no additional duty credit is admissible, and refund cannot be denied for absence of the exact prescribed phrase if the substantive requirement is met.

---