https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761756 CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appellant's SAD refund claim under Notification No. 102/2007-CUS. The tribunal found that imported parts were sold as-is without further processing, merely with different nomenclature, and individual invoices were raised for each part. The revenue's rejection on grounds that goods weren't sold "as such" was held incorrect. Additionally, the tribunal ruled that goods attracting NIL rate of VAT are treated as having appropriate VAT paid, satisfying notification conditions. The refund rejection was deemed illegal on both grounds raised by the department. en-us Tue, 12 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 Nov 2024 14:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761756 CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appellant's SAD refund claim under Notification No. 102/2007-CUS. The tribunal found that imported parts were sold as-is without further processing, merely with different nomenclature, and individual invoices were raised for each part. The revenue's rejection on grounds that goods weren't sold "as such" was held incorrect. Additionally, the tribunal ruled that goods attracting NIL rate of VAT are treated as having appropriate VAT paid, satisfying notification conditions. The refund rejection was deemed illegal on both grounds raised by the department. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 12 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761756