Order Date – 07 March 2023

Parties: M/s. S.Vaidya and Company Vs The Commissioner of Customs

Facts – 

• The Appellant, M/s. S. Vaidya and Company, filed three refund claims for refund of SAD amount of Rs.10,97,996/-. After scrutinizing the documents, the adjudicating authority observed that the sales invoices were not endorsed with the mandatory declaration that “no cenvat credit can be availed on the invoices”, and the same was rejected.

Issue –

• Whether the sales invoices are required to endorse with “no cenvat credit can be availed on the invoices” to claim refund of SAD?

Order –

• The Tribunal observed that the issue has been decided by the Larger Bench in the case of Chowgule & Company wherein it was held “A trader-importer, who paid SAD on the imported goods and who discharged VAT/ST liability on subsequent sale, and who issued commercial invoices without indicating any details of the duty paid, would be entitled to the benefit of exemption under Notification No.102/2007-Cus., notwithstanding the fact that he made no endorsement that “credit of duty is not admissible” on the commercial invoices, subject to the satisfaction of the other conditions stipulated therein.”
• Similar view was taken in the case of SIBCO Overseas Pvt. Ltd. After appreciating the facts and evidence on record and following the judgements (supra), it was held that the rejection of refund is without legal basis. 
• The impugned order rejecting the refund is set aside. The appeal is allowed