TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal remanded for re-examination of refund claim under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus after fresh CA certificate accepted</h1> <h3>M/s. Sri Sai Solutions Versus Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata.</h3> CESTAT remanded the appeal to the adjudicating authority for re-examination of a refund claim under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus after finding the ... Refund of SAD under N/N. 102/2007-CUS dated 14.09.2007 - certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant was not authentic - HELD THAT:- The identical issue came up before this Tribunal in the case of Skylark Office Machines [2023 (11) TMI 877 - CESTAT KOLKATA], wherein this Tribunal observed that 'On perusal of records, we find that no ulterior motive of the appellant towards production of the earlier certificate has been proved. They have produced a fresh Chartered Accountant’s Certificate dated 06.10.2023. Therefore, following the ratio of the cited case law, we remand the matter to the adjudicating authority.' As on the identical facts, this Tribunal has remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority, observing that no ulterior motive of the appellant towards production of the earlier certificate has been proved and they have produced a fresh Chartered Accountant’s Certificate. Therefore, following the precedent decision on the identical issue, the matter remanded back to the adjudicating authority with the direction to check the veracity of the certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant and pass a necessary order as per law. Appeal disposed off by way of remand. Appellant filed refund claims under Notification No. 102/2007-CUS dated 14.09.2007 and was allowed refund of SAD based on a Chartered Accountant's Certificate. The certificate was later found unauthentic, recovery proceedings ensued and demands were confirmed. Appellant contends production of the Chartered Accountant's Certificate is not a condition precedent under the Notification and relied on CBEC Circular No. 06/2008-CUS (28.04.2008) as procedural; appellant asserts absence of mala fide intent and produced a fresh Chartered Accountant's Certificate, seeking remand. Tribunal relied on an identical precedent (Skylark Office Machines), quoting: '5. On perusal of records, we find that no ulterior motive of the appellant towards production of the earlier certificate has been proved. They have produced a fresh Chartered Accountant's Certificate dated 06.10.2023. Therefore, following the ratio of the cited case law, we remand the matter to the adjudicating authority.' Following that ratio, the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority with direction to check the veracity of the Chartered Accountant's Certificate and pass necessary orders as per law.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
