https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176312 Refund of special additional duty could not be refused merely because multiple refund applications were filed against the same bill of entry. The operative notification did not impose any bar on filing more than one claim, and the restriction arose only from an administrative circular meant to aid procedure. Such procedural instruction was treated as non-mandatory where it would defeat substantive entitlement. The claims could be clubbed and examined together on merits, so the objection was regarded as purely technical. The refund denial was therefore not sustainable, and the matter was remanded for decision on the refund claims on merits. en-us Tue, 11 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Dec 2015 09:34:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176312 Refund of special additional duty could not be refused merely because multiple refund applications were filed against the same bill of entry. The operative notification did not impose any bar on filing more than one claim, and the restriction arose only from an administrative circular meant to aid procedure. Such procedural instruction was treated as non-mandatory where it would defeat substantive entitlement. The claims could be clubbed and examined together on merits, so the objection was regarded as purely technical. The refund denial was therefore not sustainable, and the matter was remanded for decision on the refund claims on merits. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 11 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176312