2024 (8) TMI 104

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing Authority on the grounds that the appellant has not complied with the condition at Para 2(b) of Notification No. 102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007. The Adjudication Authority held that:- "7. Para 2(b) of the Notification No. 102/2007-Cus Dt. 14.9.2007, stipulates that the importer shall specifically indicate in the sale invoices regarding the non-admissibility of Cenvat credit and the importer has failed to comply with the same. 8. The sale invoices have been raised prior to the "Out of Charge" given for the goods i.e prior to 28.09.2011. 9. The CA Certificate submitted by the importer does not rule out the case of unjust enrichment comprehensively as required vide Annex.III to the notification no. 102/2007." 2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....stries-2009 (235) ELT 214, wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that:- "20. We, as noticed hereinbefore, have no quarrel with the proposition that exemption notification should be construed strictly which means that benefit thereof should not be granted to one, who is not entitled therefor. But it is also true that those who are entitled to the benefit cannot be deprived therefrom by taking recourse to the doctrine of narrow interpretation simplicitor, although the purpose and object thereof would be defeated thereby." Further the appellant relied on the following case laws; i. Equinox Solutions Vs. CC (2011 (271) ELT 310, CESTAT, Mumbai ii. Corporation Bank Vs. Saraswathy Abharanasala 2010 (18) STR 513 S....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....presentative for the Revenue has reiterated the findings in the Impugned Order. None appeared for the appellant. 7. Heard the Authorised Representative for the Revenue and perused the records. We find that the issue involved is whether the appellant has fulfilled the stipulated conditions of Notification No. 102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007. We find that the Adjudicating Authority in his findings held that the stipulated conditions for claim of refund under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007 have been fulfilled and is also accepted the Chartered Accountant's Certificate with regard to the unjust enrichment. However, he has rejected the refund claim only on the ground that there is no specific declaration on the invoice with resp....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (ii) invoices of sale of the imported goods in respect of which refund of the said additional duty is claimed; (iii) documents evidencing payment of appropriate sales tax or value added tax, as the case may be, by the importer, on sale of such imported goods. [Emphasis supplied] 9. The Jurisdictional customs officer i.e., the Adjudicating Authority observed that the declaration on the invoice reads as "Note-No Cenvat Credit is admissible" instead of specifically indicating in the invoice that "in respect of the goods covered therein, no credit of the additional duty of customs levied under sub-section (5) of section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 shall be admissible", therefore rejected the refund claim. We find that....