https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340589 Original Bill of Entry was not a mandatory prerequisite for refund of Special Additional Duty where Notification No. 102/2007-CUS and the connected circulars did not expressly require its original production. The circular's reference to defacement was treated as directory, because its purpose was only to prevent reuse of the same document for a second claim. A refund could not be denied merely for non-production of the original Bill of Entry if the claim remained verifiable through other documents and the anti-double-claim safeguard was preserved. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed and the refund direction was sustained. en-us Tue, 29 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Feb 2018 12:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340589 Original Bill of Entry was not a mandatory prerequisite for refund of Special Additional Duty where Notification No. 102/2007-CUS and the connected circulars did not expressly require its original production. The circular's reference to defacement was treated as directory, because its purpose was only to prevent reuse of the same document for a second claim. A refund could not be denied merely for non-production of the original Bill of Entry if the claim remained verifiable through other documents and the anti-double-claim safeguard was preserved. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed and the refund direction was sustained. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 29 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340589