https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362119 Refund of Special Additional Duty under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. was treated as dependent on substantive compliance with the invoice condition, not on verbatim reproduction of the prescribed phrase. The court noted that where the invoice as a whole clearly shows that no additional customs duty credit is admissible, the refund requirement is met, and a purely literal insistence on exact wording is unwarranted. The prescribed language was characterised as procedural rather than mandatory in form, so omission of the exact words did not by itself defeat the refund claim. en-us Tue, 05 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Sep 2018 14:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362119 Refund of Special Additional Duty under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. was treated as dependent on substantive compliance with the invoice condition, not on verbatim reproduction of the prescribed phrase. The court noted that where the invoice as a whole clearly shows that no additional customs duty credit is admissible, the refund requirement is met, and a purely literal insistence on exact wording is unwarranted. The prescribed language was characterised as procedural rather than mandatory in form, so omission of the exact words did not by itself defeat the refund claim. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 05 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362119