ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation
Date: 16.10.2025
CESTAT Chennai Allows Refund Claim Despite Procedural Lapse in Compliance with Customs Notification
This Article has been written by Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha, Advocate based in New Delhi. The views expressed are based on his interpretation of the law. He can be reached at his email id intelconsul@gmail.com or on his Mobile +91-9999005379.
In a significant ruling, the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai, recently addressed a dispute involving M/s. β N.R. Colours Ltd. and the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai. βThe case revolved around the rejection of a refund claim for Special Additional Duty (SAD) under Notification No. β 102/2007-Customs. The Tribunalβs decision sheds light on the interpretation of procedural compliance and the broader principles of justice in refund claims.
Background of the Case
M/s. N.R. Colours Ltd. filed a refund claim for Rs. 3,10,795/- on February 26, 2014, under Notification No. 102/2007-Customs, which allows for the refund of 4% SAD paid on imported goods, provided certain conditions are met. The claim pertained to the import of goods such as “Pentacrythritol Mono Grade, MHEC, and Re-dispersable Emulsion Powder” under seven bills of entry. β
The refund claim was rejected by the adjudicating authority and subsequently by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals-II) on the grounds that the sales invoices submitted by the appellant did not contain the mandatory endorsement as required under para 2(b) of the notification. β This endorsement states that “no credit of Additional Duty of Customs shall be admissible” on the goods sold.
Source: CESTAT Chennai
Handy Download:
Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com
Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379
Leave a Reply