Refund claim failed for lack of proof that reprocessed goods were the same as duty-paid goods earlier cleared.

Refund on reprocessed goods depended on proof that the goods cleared after repacking were the same goods earlier cleared on payment of duty. The appellant relied on batch cards to establish identity and correlation, but no statutory obligation to maintain such cards was shown and the cards did not, by themselves, prove the required link. No other evidence was produced to establish that the goods received back, reprocessed and cleared again were the same goods originally cleared. The cited precedents were held inapplicable. The refund claim was therefore denied and the denial upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant established that the goods cleared after repacking were the same goods that had earlier been cleared on payment of duty, so as to sustain the refund claim.

Analysis: The dispute turned on proof of identity between the originally cleared goods and the goods subsequently received back, reprocessed and cleared again. The appellant relied on batch cards to establish that link, but no statutory requirement for maintaining batch cards was shown. The authorities found that the batch cards did not establish the necessary correlation, and no other evidence proving identity of the goods was produced. The precedents cited did not address this issue and were not applicable.

Conclusion: The appellant failed to establish the required correlation or identity of goods. The denial of refund was upheld.

---