1997 (10) TMI 184

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... [Order per : Shiben K. Dhar, Member (T)]. This Revenue appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal dated 26-9-1988. 2. The issue relates to admissibility or otherwise of refund on goods removed under Chapter X when there was delay in receipt of AR 3 certificates. 3. Arguing for the Revenue, the learned DR submits that they did not produce rewarehousing certificate as required under Ru .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... AR 3 forms were submitted alongwith claim certified by the consignee confirming that the goods were received by the respondents. What was relevant to find out was whether or not the goods removed from the consigner s end had been received by the consignee. The Revenue have no where contended that these goods which moved under Chapter X procedure for specified industrial purposes were diverted enro .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X