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>Tribunal Approves Refund Claim Despite Minor Discrepancies Between Bill of Entry and Sales Invoices; Rejection Overturned.</h1> <h3>Pradhin Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs (Port-Export), Chennai</h3> Pradhin Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs (Port-Export), Chennai - TMI Issues involved:Refund claim for Special Additional Duty paid at the time of import under Notification No.102/2007 as amended rejected due to discrepancy in description of goods in bill of entry and sales invoices.Summary:The appellant filed a refund claim for Special Additional Duty paid during import, which was rejected by the original authorities citing a mismatch in the description of goods between the bill of entry and sales invoices. The appellant contended that the description in the bill of entry was based on duty classification, while the sales invoices used different terms due to local market practices. The appellant provided a Chartered Accountant certificate and correlation statements to support their claim. The Tribunal noted that minor discrepancies in descriptions should not disqualify the importer from receiving a refund, as long as the goods imported align with the invoices. The Tribunal found the rejection of the refund claim unjustified and allowed the appeal with consequential reliefs.In a similar vein, the Tribunal referenced a case where the High Court emphasized the importance of Chartered Accountant certificates in refund claims. Since the adjudicating authority did not provide valid reasons to disregard the CA certificate in this case, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant and allowed the refund claim.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
