Strict documentary compliance governs special CVD refund claims where stockist sales are relied upon.

Refund of special additional customs duty under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. was unavailable where the importer failed to prove strict compliance with the prescribed substantive and documentary conditions. The notification required proof of appropriate sales tax or VAT payment, prescribed invoices, duty payment evidence, and satisfaction of the customs officer that the conditions were met. Where refund was claimed on the basis of consignment sale through a stockist, the governing circular also required an authorising agreement and invoices showing sale on behalf of the importer. As the agreement was dated after the import period, invoices were not produced, and no reliable proof of stockist sales or VAT payment was shown, the refund claim could not be sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to refund of the special additional customs duty under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. when the prescribed conditions and supporting documents for consignment sale through stockist were not established.

Analysis: The refund notification required, among other things, payment of appropriate sales tax or value added tax on sale, production of the prescribed invoices and proof of duty payment, and satisfaction of the customs officer that the conditions were fulfilled. The circular governing sales through consignment agents or stockists further required an agreement authorising such sale and invoices showing that the sale was made on behalf of the importer. The agreement on record was dated after the import period, the invoices were not produced, and there was no reliable evidence that the goods were sold by the stockist on behalf of the importer or that VAT was paid in the manner required. In the absence of these foundational documents, the refund claim could not be sustained on the basis of mere procedural or general assertions.

Conclusion: The appellant was not eligible for refund, and rejection of the refund claims was justified.

Final Conclusion: The statutory preconditions for grant of refund of special CVD were not proved, so the appellate relief was unavailable.

Ratio Decidendi: A refund claim under the notification can succeed only on proof of strict fulfilment of the prescribed substantive and documentary conditions, including compliance with the consignment-sale requirements where stockist sales are relied upon.

---