SAD refund claims require proper enquiry before rejecting invoices and Chartered Accountant certificates; remand ordered for fresh consideration.

Rejection of SAD refund under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. was challenged where the authorities relied on alleged forged invoices and a disputed Chartered Accountant certificate. The record showed reconciliation statements and supporting documents had been filed, but the discrepancies were treated as proof of forgery without proper enquiry, and the explanations offered were not meaningfully examined. The certificate submitted in terms of the notification was also discarded without adequate basis. The order was therefore set aside and the refund claim remanded for de novo consideration after examining the correlation statement and supporting certificate.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rejection of refund of Special Additional Duty under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. on the basis of alleged forged invoices and a purported false Chartered Accountant certificate was sustainable, and whether the matter warranted remand for fresh consideration.

Analysis: The refund claim was rejected on allegations of forged and fabricated invoices and an incorrect Chartered Accountant certificate. The record showed that the appellants had produced reconciliation statements and supporting documents, but the authorities treated the discrepancies in the invoices as proof of forgery without proper enquiry or investigation. The explanations offered by the appellants were not considered in a meaningful manner, and the Chartered Accountant certificate furnished in terms of the notification was also discarded without adequate basis. In these circumstances, the rejection order suffered from infirmities requiring reconsideration of the refund claim.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the original authority for de novo adjudication of the SAD refund claim after considering the correlation statement and supporting certificate.

---