TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 110
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1 on the ground of limitation. 2. Factual backdrop of the case is that appellant had paid 4% SAD on importation of Timber Round Logs. Later on appellant filed refund claim for 4% SAD amounting to Rs. 1,51,90,212/- on the basis of exemption allowed under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007. The said notification stipulates that an importer shall file a claim of Refund of SAD with the jurisdictional customs officer before the expiry of one year from the date of payment of SAD. It was alleged that the refund claim was filed by the Appellant after the expiry of one year and hence the claim appeared to be hit by limitation. Show cause notice dated 06.08.2019 was issued to the Appellant proposing rejection of the refund claim. In ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as clarified that round logs were classifiable under heading 4407 and therefore, refund was not permissible. Due to circular, the Appellant had no option but to wait the outcome of the final decision on the issue pending before the Hon'ble Supreme court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld the stand of Appellant on 24.04.2018 and therefore, the Appellant rightly filed the refund on 17.01.2018 and therefore, the Appellant filed the refund on 17.01.2019 within a period of one year from the date of decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 4. He submits that pursuant to the Board circular, the department stopped accepting the refund claims in a case where the importers paid SAD on round logs and claimed refund of VAT paid on subsequent sale of sa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....escribed under Section 27 of the Customs Act. 7. He also relies upon the following judgments in support of his contention: (i) Sony India Pvt. Limited vs. Commissioner of Customs- 2014(304) ELT 660 (Del) (ii) Commissioner of Customs (Import) vs. Gulati Sales Corporation - 2018 (360) ELT 277 (Del.) (iii) Utkal Lumbers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India - 2017(345) ELT 101 (Guj.) (iv) Singla Trading Co. vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi - 2012(285) ELT 256 (Tri. Del.) 8. Shri R P Parekh, learned Superintendent, AR appearing on behalf of the revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order-in-appeal. He placed reliance on the following judgments:- (i) CC, Hyderabad Vs. Surya Telecom Pvt. L....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e case there is distinct classification for the imported and the final products that are same in market on which VAT was paid. We noticed that since the entire issue was sub-judice, Appellant had not filed the refund claim for subsequent imports. However, in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Appellant had filed the refund claim on 17.01.2019 for the goods imported during the period between 29.12.2008 to 03.03.2011. Clearly, in the present case, the eligibility of refund arise only after the issue attained finality. The Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld the stand of Appellant on 24.04.2018 and appellant rightly filed the refund claim on 17.01.2009 within the period of one year from the date of decision of the Hon'ble Supr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hese importers are claiming the refund of 4% SAD paid at the time of importation of goods in terms of Notification No. 102/2007-Customs, dated 14-9-2007. As per the said Notification, refund of SAD is available only in case the imported goods are subsequently sold on payment of VAT, without carrying out any process. However, at the time of claiming refund of 4% SAD, these importers have manipulated the facts by showing that goods sold were imported timber logs only and not 'sawn' or 'cut logs'. In terms of the classification of the First Schedule to Customs Tariff Act, 1975, round logs/round squares are classified under the heading 4403 whereas the 'sawn' woods are classified separately under heading 4407. Thus, there is distinct classifica....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....andi may have all India ramifications and may be prevalent in other field formations and are not limited only to a few cases. In view of the above, all field formations are directed to be alert and vigilant to ensure that unscrupulous importers do not avail fraudulent refunds of 4% SAD in terms of Notification No. 102/2007-Customs, dated 14-9-2007 by resorting to the above-mentioned modus operandi. From the above circular, it is clear that the appellant was not allowed to file refund claim by the government till the issue on merit was settled by the Hon'ble Apex court in the appellant's own case reported at 2018 (360) ELT 790 (SC). In the peculiar fact of this case the period upto the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court shall be reduce....