https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410961 Refund claims under Notification No. 102/2007 required proof that the goods sold in the domestic market were the same goods imported, with the sales invoices and supporting records correlating to the bills of entry and describing the goods consistently. Because the record showed uncertainty on that correlation and incomplete factual verification, the appellate determination could not stand. The appellant was to be given an opportunity to supply the necessary material, and the claim was remanded to the original authority for fresh adjudication of entitlement to post-import refund of special additional duty. en-us Wed, 04 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Aug 2021 09:06:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410961 Refund claims under Notification No. 102/2007 required proof that the goods sold in the domestic market were the same goods imported, with the sales invoices and supporting records correlating to the bills of entry and describing the goods consistently. Because the record showed uncertainty on that correlation and incomplete factual verification, the appellate determination could not stand. The appellant was to be given an opportunity to supply the necessary material, and the claim was remanded to the original authority for fresh adjudication of entitlement to post-import refund of special additional duty. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 04 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410961