Tribunal overturns refund denial, citing missing invoice endorsement under Customs Tariff Act.

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order rejecting the refund claim due to a missing endorsement on sales invoices under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The case was remanded to the adjudicating authority for the appellant to submit complete invoices for verification in accordance with legal precedents cited, including the Chowgule & Company Pvt. Ltd. decision. The appeal was allowed for further consideration, emphasizing compliance with the notification requirements.

---

---

Issues:
Refund claim rejection based on missing endorsement on sales invoice under Customs Tariff Act, 1975.

Analysis:
The appellants, engaged in trading baby diapers in India, imported diapers and paid additional duty of customs (SAD) under section 3(5) of Customs Tariff Act, 1975. They sought a refund of the SAD paid under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. The refund claim was rejected due to the absence of the required endorsement on sales invoices indicating that CENVAT credit of SAD is not admissible. The appellant contended that the issue was settled by a Larger Bench decision in Chowgule & Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs. The AR for the respondent highlighted that the appellant had not produced invoices, necessitating verification of their authenticity.

The Tribunal noted that the rejection of the refund was solely based on the missing endorsement on the commercial invoices, a requirement under para 2(b) of the notification. Referring to the Chowgule & Company Pvt. Ltd. case and a similar decision in Chimanlal Fein Paper Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai, the Tribunal agreed with the appellant's counsel that the issue had been addressed in previous judgments. However, as the sales invoices were not fully submitted by the appellant, the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority. The authority was directed to allow the appellant to furnish the complete invoices and consider the applicability of the Chowgule & Company Pvt. Ltd. decision and the cited final order.

In conclusion, the impugned order rejecting the refund claim was set aside, and the appeal was allowed for remand to the adjudicating authority. The Tribunal emphasized the need for the appellant to provide the complete sales invoices for further consideration in light of the legal precedents discussed during the proceedings.

---