SAD refund under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus cannot be denied solely for missing invoice particulars on duty payment.

Refund of Special Additional Duty under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus could not be denied merely because the sale invoices did not separately mention the SAD payment or corresponding bill of entry particulars. The Tribunal applied the requirement that the invoice must show that Cenvat credit of the additional duty would not be admissible, and held that, without the stipulated particulars, there could be no deemed passing of the duty to the buyer. The refund was therefore held admissible and the denial set aside, except for two bills of entry that had already been rejected for want of jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether refund of Special Additional Duty paid on imported goods under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus could be denied solely because the sale invoices did not specifically mention the SAD payment or the corresponding bill of entry particulars.

Analysis: The refund claim arose under the exemption-cum-refund scheme for SAD. The governing condition required the seller's invoice to indicate that no Cenvat credit of the additional duty would be admissible. On the facts, the invoices did not separately show SAD or bill of entry details. Applying the Larger Bench view on the necessity of invoice particulars for passing duty credit, the Tribunal held that in the absence of the stipulated particulars there could be no deemed passing of the duty, particularly SAD, to the buyer. The Tribunal also noted that two specified bills of entry had already been rejected for want of jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The refund was held admissible and the denial was set aside, except for the two bills of entry rejected for want of jurisdiction.

---