https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176598 A refund claim under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus was held to require fresh factual verification because the supporting documents had not been properly examined by the adjudicating authority. The appellate forum noted that documents were produced before the Commissioner (Appeals), but their sufficiency and relevance needed proper scrutiny at the original stage. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for de novo adjudication, with a proper opportunity of hearing to the importer. The operative effect was that the refund dispute was sent back for re-examination of the documentary requirements rather than decided finally on merits. en-us Mon, 23 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Dec 2015 09:00:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176598 A refund claim under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus was held to require fresh factual verification because the supporting documents had not been properly examined by the adjudicating authority. The appellate forum noted that documents were produced before the Commissioner (Appeals), but their sufficiency and relevance needed proper scrutiny at the original stage. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for de novo adjudication, with a proper opportunity of hearing to the importer. The operative effect was that the refund dispute was sent back for re-examination of the documentary requirements rather than decided finally on merits. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 23 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176598