The Hon’ble CESTAT Chennai vide its order dated 14.03.2022 in the matter of M/s Ingram Micro India Limted Vs. The Commissioner of Customs (Exports) in Custom Appeal No. – 40071 of 2015 observing that the refund has been rejected in a cryptic manner held that the refund claims have to be processed in proper manner as the interest on such delayed refund is paid out of public money and remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority to process the refund on the basis of documents produced by the Appellant.

The Appellant preferred the appeal being aggrieved of rejection of its refund claim submitted for SAD in terms of notification no. 102/2007 – Cus. dated 14.09.2007 as amended by Notification No.93/2008 dated 01.08.2008 read with Board’s Circular No.6/2008-Cus. dated 28.04.2008 and 16/2008-Cus. dated 13.10.2008.

Facts: –

• The Appellant in terms of notification 102/2007-cus. dated 14.09.2007 filed a refund claim of Rs. 22,57,529/- on 16.06.2009 which later on was revised to Rs. 18,84,710/- and all the supporting documents were submitted by the appellant.
• The documents were submitted by the appellant through its letter dated 05.2010 and the same was acknowledged by the original authority on 18.05.2010 however after two years the original authority rejected the refund claim on the ground that the appellant did not provide the Chartered accountant certificate to substantiate that the burden of additional duty has not been passed to the buyer and to rule out the unjust enrichment. Hence the present appeal has been filed.To read more subscribe today: www.taxo.online