(Judgment of the Court was delivered by
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.)
This appeal has been filed by the Commissioner of Customs
under Section 130 of “the Customs Act, 1962” (for brevity hereinafter
referred to as “the Act”), against the order passed by “the Customs,
Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal” (in short “CESTAT”).
2. The respondent filed 34 numbers of refund claims from
September 2013 to February 2017 in respect of 209 Bills of Entry for the
refund of 4% Special Additional Duty (SAD) under Notification No.
102/2007-Customs dated 14.09.2007. On scrutiny, it was found that the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/03/2026 11:49:09 am )
goods sold were different from the goods imported and hence, further
investigation was done by the Special Intelligence and Investigation
Branch. As per the investigation conducted, it was found that the
importer had sent the imported oats to the job workers, who had
undertaken three types of job work on the imported oats and thereby, the
goods sold assumed a different character and therefore, the respondent
did not fulfil the conditions specified in paragraph 2 of the Notification
No.102/2007. Since the imported goods were not sold as such without
being subjected to any further process, an Order-in-Original dated
09.05.2017 came to be passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs
to the following effect: