https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778987 CESTAT AHMEDABAD - AT allowed the appeal and held the appellants entitled to refund of SAD under N/N.102/2007-Cus (14.09.2007). The Tribunal found that sale of timber after cutting/sawing did not defeat the notification since the key requirement is import for subsequent sale; discrepancies in number of pieces, CBM variances, or absence of endorsements did not justify denial of refund. The penalty imposed on the authorised signatory was set aside and the impugned orders of the Adjudicating Authority and Commissioner (Appeals) were quashed. en-us Tue, 23 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Sep 2025 08:26:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778987 CESTAT AHMEDABAD - AT allowed the appeal and held the appellants entitled to refund of SAD under N/N.102/2007-Cus (14.09.2007). The Tribunal found that sale of timber after cutting/sawing did not defeat the notification since the key requirement is import for subsequent sale; discrepancies in number of pieces, CBM variances, or absence of endorsements did not justify denial of refund. The penalty imposed on the authorised signatory was set aside and the impugned orders of the Adjudicating Authority and Commissioner (Appeals) were quashed. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 23 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778987