https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755477 CESTAT Bangalore allowed the appeal regarding SAD refund claim on imported goods. The appellant had paid SAD under N/N. 102/2007 and sought refund, which was rejected due to inadequate CA certificate. The Tribunal held that importers could choose between N/N. 102/2007 (covering trading goods) and N/N. 29/2010 (pre-packaged goods) as no restriction existed. Following precedent in Suburban Engineering Works case, the Tribunal ruled that payment of SAD under chosen notification doesn't constitute admission of liability. The appellant was eligible for SAD refund under N/N. 102/2007, and the impugned order was set aside. en-us Thu, 11 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Jul 2024 12:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755477 CESTAT Bangalore allowed the appeal regarding SAD refund claim on imported goods. The appellant had paid SAD under N/N. 102/2007 and sought refund, which was rejected due to inadequate CA certificate. The Tribunal held that importers could choose between N/N. 102/2007 (covering trading goods) and N/N. 29/2010 (pre-packaged goods) as no restriction existed. Following precedent in Suburban Engineering Works case, the Tribunal ruled that payment of SAD under chosen notification doesn't constitute admission of liability. The appellant was eligible for SAD refund under N/N. 102/2007, and the impugned order was set aside. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 11 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755477