https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112736 The appeal was allowed, and the Commissioner (Appeals) order was set aside, restoring the Asstt. Collector's original decision. The Asstt. Collector was not satisfied with the lack of evidence regarding the loss of the duplicate invoice, leading to non-compliance with procedural requirements outlined in the Avis Electronics case. The respondent did not appear, and the departmental representative highlighted that credit should only be taken on the original copy if the duplicate is lost in transit, subject to the satisfaction of the Asstt. Commissioner about the loss. en-us Mon, 13 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 May 2012 15:33:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112736 The appeal was allowed, and the Commissioner (Appeals) order was set aside, restoring the Asstt. Collector's original decision. The Asstt. Collector was not satisfied with the lack of evidence regarding the loss of the duplicate invoice, leading to non-compliance with procedural requirements outlined in the Avis Electronics case. The respondent did not appear, and the departmental representative highlighted that credit should only be taken on the original copy if the duplicate is lost in transit, subject to the satisfaction of the Asstt. Commissioner about the loss. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 13 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112736