Substantive customs refund cannot be denied for curable invoice defects where the exemption's object is otherwise satisfied.

A refund under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. was treated as a substantive conditional exemption intended to avoid double benefit on imported goods, and denial on curable invoice or chartered accountant certificate defects was held unwarranted where the imported and sold goods were identifiable and the notification's object was otherwise satisfied. The requirement of declaration in the sales invoice and supporting certificate was viewed as procedural rather than essential to the exemption, especially for a trader who was not a registered excise dealer. The claim nevertheless remained subject to the statutory bar of unjust enrichment.

---

---

Issues: Whether refund of additional customs duty under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. could be denied for procedural defects in the invoices and chartered accountant certificate, despite the substantive conditions being met.

Analysis: The refund arose from a conditional post-import exemption intended to prevent double benefit by ensuring that the additional duty paid on import was not again taken as credit on subsequent sale. The requirement of declaration in the sales invoice and supporting chartered accountant certification was treated as procedural in nature, not going to the essence of the exemption, particularly where the importer was a trader and not a registered excise dealer. The record indicated that the imported goods and the sold goods were identifiable, and the alleged discrepancy in the certificate regarding period particulars was capable of verification by the department. In such circumstances, denial of refund for technical lapses would defeat the purpose of the notification. The claim remained subject to the statutory bar of unjust enrichment.

Conclusion: The refund could not be rejected on the stated procedural grounds, and the assessee was entitled to the benefit of the notification.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the impugned rejection was set aside, and consequential relief followed.

Ratio Decidendi: A substantive benefit under a conditional exemption or refund notification should not be denied for curable procedural defects where the object of the notification is otherwise satisfied and the claim is not barred by unjust enrichment.

---