Re-warehousing proof requires verification of AR3A records before acceptance, and photocopies are not automatically rejected.

Rules 156A and 156B governed acceptance of re-warehousing documents, and the Commissioner (Appeals) was entitled to require verification of AR3A forms and related records before treating them as proof. The appellate direction did not waive statutory compliance; it required the Assistant Commissioner to examine the documents and accept them only after due verification. The objection that photocopies could not be relied on was rejected because the decisive point was verification of the material produced, not automatic rejection of copies. The revenue challenge therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in directing verification of the AR3A documents and other relevant records before accepting them as proof of re-warehousing, and in setting aside the duty demand on that basis.

Analysis: Rules 156A and 156B governed the procedure for acceptance of documents relating to re-warehousing. The order under challenge required the Assistant Commissioner to verify the AR3As and other relevant records and accept them only after due verification. The appellate order did not dispense with the statutory requirements; it called for compliance with them through verification of the material produced.

Conclusion: The direction for due verification was held to be correct, and the revenue objection that photocopies could not be accepted was not accepted in view of the verification requirement. The appeal failed.

---