https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335995 For a trader claiming refund of SAD under Notification No. 102/2007-Customs, the Tribunal held that the invoice-endorsing condition in para 2(b) was not mandatory where the commercial invoice did not disclose any duty element. It followed the Larger Bench view that, in such a case, the question of availing CENVAT credit does not arise and the purpose of the notification condition is met by non-disclosure of the duty element in the invoice. The rejection of refund was set aside, and the trader was held entitled to refund with consequential relief. en-us Fri, 21 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Dec 2016 11:00:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335995 For a trader claiming refund of SAD under Notification No. 102/2007-Customs, the Tribunal held that the invoice-endorsing condition in para 2(b) was not mandatory where the commercial invoice did not disclose any duty element. It followed the Larger Bench view that, in such a case, the question of availing CENVAT credit does not arise and the purpose of the notification condition is met by non-disclosure of the duty element in the invoice. The rejection of refund was set aside, and the trader was held entitled to refund with consequential relief. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 21 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335995