9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (1) TMI 463X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt. [Order]. - The appellants had exported a consignment of T.L. Tower material to Nepal Electricity Authority, Kathmandu on payment of duty of Rs. 69,025/-. Subsequently, they filed a refund claim with the proper officer of Central Excise, saying that they ought to have paid duty only to the extent of Rs. 12,320/- and hence there was excess payment of Rs. 56,705/-. This claim for refund of Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvolving amount of duty amounting to Rs. 69025/-. Thus, the goods exported by the appellants under the aforesaid invoice cannot be corroborated with the refund claim filed. In view of above, I hold that the appellants have failed to prove that the corroboration between the value of goods exported and the value of contract between the appellants and M/s. Prem Power Contraction Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2000. (vi) Copy of the excise invoice No. 117 dated 30-6-2000. (vii) Copy of the Packing List No. 422/2000-01, dated 30-6-2000. (viii) Copy of the consignee copy of the MTR No. 108. (ix) Copy of the letter No. 188-Vt/2001-503, dated 16-5-2001. (x) Cop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the orders passed by the original and first appellate authorities. 4. On a perusal of the afore listed documents (copies available), I am of the prima facie view that the refund claim is well-supported. However, I do not think it is proper to examine the case further at this stage as I find that none of the lower authorities applied its mind to the evidence adduced by the party. The ori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
