https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757258 CESTAT Chennai allowed the appeal and set aside the order rejecting SAD refund claims. The lower authority had rejected refunds citing mismatch between goods description in bills of entry and sales invoices, and discrepancy between SAD paid and CST/VAT discharged. The Tribunal held that appellant had produced required CA certificate with reconciliation statement per Board's Circular 6/2008. Minor description discrepancies don't invalidate refund claims and are curable. Rate differences in SAD versus VAT/CST payments cannot defeat refund applications when effective tax rates were paid. The CA certificate should ordinarily be relied upon for sanctioning claims absent incriminating evidence. en-us Tue, 20 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Aug 2024 08:57:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757258 CESTAT Chennai allowed the appeal and set aside the order rejecting SAD refund claims. The lower authority had rejected refunds citing mismatch between goods description in bills of entry and sales invoices, and discrepancy between SAD paid and CST/VAT discharged. The Tribunal held that appellant had produced required CA certificate with reconciliation statement per Board's Circular 6/2008. Minor description discrepancies don't invalidate refund claims and are curable. Rate differences in SAD versus VAT/CST payments cannot defeat refund applications when effective tax rates were paid. The CA certificate should ordinarily be relied upon for sanctioning claims absent incriminating evidence. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 20 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757258